# 


$ 


JHLV.'--.,  - 


THE   RISE  OF  THE 
MEDIAEVAL  CHURCH 

AND  ITS  INFLUENCE  ON  THE  CIVILISATION   OF 

WESTERN    EUROPE   FROM   THE   FIRST  TO  THE 

THIRTEENTH   CENTURY 


BY 
ALEXANDER  CLARENCE  FLICK,  Ph.  D.,  Lrrr.  D. 

PROFESSOR   OF   EUROPEAN    HISTORY    IN   SYRACUSE   UNIVERSITY 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 

NEW     YORK    AND     LONDON 

Zbc  Utnicfterbocfcer  press 

1909 


J  1 9- 


'       \,1 


Copyright,  1909 

BY 

ALEXANDER  CLARENCE  FLICK 


Hfte  Knickerbocker  prees,  Hew  Korfe 


TO 
HENRY  C.  LEA 


Who  through  his  numerous  scholarly  monographs  has  earned  the  foremost 
place  among  American  Church  historians,  both  at  home  and  abroad, 


PROFESSOR  DOCTOR  ADOLPH  HARNACK 

To  whom  both  the  Old  and  the  New  World  are  profoundly  indebted  for  his 

scholarly  labours,  and  from  whose  inspiration  in  public  lectures  and 

private  conferences  this  work  derived  much  that  is  best  in  it, 

This  Book  is  Gratefully  Dedicated. 


PREFACE 

THE  educational  value  of  any  subject  depends 
primarily  upon  its  own  intrinsic  value.  The 
teacning  of  Church  history  for  ten  years  as  a 
regular  course  in  liberal  arts,  side  by  side  with  the 
"orthodox"  courses  in  history,  has  demonstrated 
beyond  question  that  this  subject  can  be  made  at 
once  very  popular  and  very  valuable.  It  has  proved 
its  right  to  exist  as  a  cultural  subject.  Yet  the  lack 
of  intelligent  information,  even  among  educated  people, 
concerning  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  both 
in  early  and  modern  days,  is  simply  appalling. 

The  comparatively  recent  revival  of  interest  in 
Church  history  has  given  birth  to  many  general  Church 
histories  from  English  and  American  scholars.  Numer- 
ous translations  of  discriminating  and  painstaking 
German  authors  are  also  available.  A  large  number  of 
intensive  monographs  has  likewise  appeared.  But 
all  these  texts  are  written  for  classes  in  theological 
schools.  Not  a  single  Church  history  suitable  either 
for  regular  college  work,  or  for  popular  reading,  is 
available ;  and  yet  all  the  standard  courses  in  history  are 
provided  with  up-to-date  texts  and  illustrative  material. 
This  work  is  intended  to  meet  the  need  I  have  felt 
in  my  own  classes,  and  have  heard  expressed  from 
fellow  teachers  and  laymen,  for  a  simple  account  of 


vi  Preface 

the  evolution  of  the  old  Church  minus  all  theological 
and  dogmatic  discussions.  The  purpose  has  been 
to  show  the  origin  of  the  Christian  Church,  its  develop- 
ment in  organisation,  the  forces  which  produced  the 
Papacy,  and  the  marvellous,  formative  influence  of  the 
Roman  Church  upon  the  civilisation  of  Western 
Europe.  To  that  end  the  principal  lines  of  develop- 
ment are  emphasised  at  every  point,  while  the  sub- 
ordinate influences  have  been  minimised.  Causes 
and  results,  continuity  and  differentiation,  and  unity 
have  been  constantly  kept  in  mind. 

The  subject-matter  of  this  volume  was  worked 
out  during  a  prolonged  residence  in  Europe.  Most  of 
that  time  was  spent  in  Germany  under  the  inspiration 
of  the  foremost  authorities  in  Church  history,  among 
whom  may  be  mentioned  Professor  Nippold  of  Jena, 
Professor  Loofs  of  Halle,  Professor  Hauck  of  Leip- 
zig, and  particularly  Professor  Harnack  of  Berlin. 
The  work  of  the  lecture-room  and  seminar  was  sup- 
plemented by  investigation  in  the  Royal  Library 
of  Berlin,  the  Vatican  Library  at  Rome,  the  National 
Library  at  Paris,  and  the  Library  of  the  British 
Museum.  The  materials  thus  gathered  were  further 
organised  and  elaborated  in  a  course  of  lectures  on 
Church  history  given  in  Syracuse  University. 

The  references  in  the  text  and  the  bibliographies 
at  the  end  of  chapters  are  given,  so  far  as  possible,  to 
English  sources.  It  is  believed  that  the  exclusion 
of  a  pedantic  list  of  foreign  works  will  make  the  work 
more  useful.  It  is  hoped  that  the  student  will  be 
induced  to  go  to  the  library,  the  laboratory  of  the 
historian,  and  there  by  extensive  and  intensive  reading 
supplement  the  text. 


Preface  vii 

Should  this  volume  prove  to  be  of  service,  it  will  be 
followed  by  two  companion  volumes — one  on  the  Re- 
formation and  another  on  the  modern  Church.  It 
is  further  planned  to  publish  a  source-book  on  Church 
history  to  supplement  the  texts. 

My  indebtedness  to  books  and  men  is  so  great  that  it 
would  be  impossible  to  enumerate  them  here.  While 
all  sources  have  been  laid  under  tribute,  special  obli- 
gation is  felt  to  many  monographs  and  intensive 
studies. 

Alexander  C.  Flick. 


Syracuse  University. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I 


The  Study  of  Church  History  i 

Outline:  I. — Present  status  of  history  in  college 
work.  II. — Ecclesiastical  history  excluded  since  the 
Reformation  by  political  history.  III. — New  view 
of  the  Mediaeval  Church  and  its  influence.  IV. — Re- 
naissance of  interest  in  Church  history.  V. — Peda- 
gogical value  and  treatment  of  Church  history.  VI. — 
Sources. 

CHAPTER  II 

General  Bibliography  on  Church  History  .  .       12 

Outline:  I. — Primary  materials.  II. — Secondary 
materials.  III. — Sketch  of  the  writing  of  Church  his- 
tory. IV. — Most  important  collections  of  primary 
sources.  V. — Most  important  general  Church  histories. 
VI. — Dictionaries  and  encyclopedias.  VII. — Atlases 
and  chronologies.     VIII. — Text-books.     IX. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  III 

Preparation   of  the   Civilised   World   for  the 

Christian  Church     ......       40 

Outline:  I. — The  ancient  world.  II. — Condition  of 
the  civilised  world  at  the  time  Jesus  came.  III. — 
How  the  condition  of  the  world  prepared  the  way  for 
Christianity.     IV. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  IV 

Origin,  Spread,  and  Organisation  of  the  Church 

during  the  Apostolic  Age         ....       52 

Outline:  I. — Origin  of  the  Christian  Church.  II. — 
Spread  of  the  Apostolic  Church.  III. — Organisation  of 
the    Early    Church.     IV. — Conclusions.     V. — Sources. 


Contents 


CHAPTER  V 

The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy     .  .       71 

Outline  :  I. — Planting  of  the  Church  in  Rome  and  its 
organisation  there.  II. — The  two  opposing  views  of  the 
Petrine  theory.  III. — Proofs  advanced  for  the  Petrine 
theory.  IV. — Evidence  given  against  the  Petrine 
theory.     V. — Historical  conclusions.     VI. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  VI 

The    Roman    Government's    Treatment    op    the 

Christians        .......       91 

Outline:  I. — Religious  persecutions  before  the  Chris- 
tian era.  II. — Christians  first  persecuted  by  the  Jews. 
III. — Causes  and  motives  of  persecution  by  the  Roman 
government.  IV. — Number  and  general  character  of 
the  persecutions.  V. — Results  of  persecutions.  VI. — 
Sources. 

CHAPTER  VII 

Transition  of  the  Church  Under  Constantine   .     112 

Outline:  I. — Condition  of  the  Empire  in  300.  II. — 
How  Constantine  became  Emperor.  III. — Constan- 
tine's  conversion  to  Christianity.  IV. — Constantine's 
favours  to  Christianity.  V. — Constantine's  character. 
VI. — Constantine's  historical  significance.  VII. — 
Sources. 

CHAPTER  VIII 

The  Council  of  Nice  a  and  its  Results        .         .131 

Outline:  I. — Diversion  of  Christian  thought  in  the 
early  Church.  II. — The  Arian  controversy.  III. — 
The  Council  of  Nicasa  and  its  actions.  IV. — Later 
history  of  Arianism.     V. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  IX 

Rise  of  the  Papacy     .  .  .  .  .  .148 

Outline:  I. — Favourable  conditions  when  the 
Christian  era  began.  II. — Forces  at  work  up  to  313. 
III. — Description  of  the  Roman  Church  in  313.  iV. — 
Growth  of  the  Papacy  from  313  to  604.  V. — Condition 
of  the  Papacy  at  the  close  of  this  period,  604.  VI. — 
Sources. 


Contents  xi 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  X 

Rise  of  the  Papacy  {Continued)    .  .  .  .164 

CHAPTER  XI 

Monasticism  .  .  .  •  •  •  .198 

Outline:  I. — Importance  of  the  institution  of  mon- 
asticism. II. — Antecedents  and  analogies.  III. — 
Causes  of  the  origin  of  Christian  monasticism.  IV. — 
Evolution  of  Christian  monasticism.  V. — Spread  of 
group  monasticism  from  the  East  to  the  West.  VI. — 
Development  of  monasticism  in  Western  Europe.  VII. 
■ — Opposition  to  monasticism.  VIII. — Results  and 
influences  of  monasticism.     IX. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  XII 

Spread  of  the  Christian  Church  over  Europe     .     229 

Outline:  I. — Extent  of  Christianity  under  Gregory 
the  Great.  II. — Character  of  missionary  work  from  the 
sixth  to  the  tenth  century.  III. — Conversion  of 
the  British  Isles.  IV. — Conversion  of  the  Franks.  V. 
— Conversion  of  the  Germans.  VI. — Conversion  of 
Scandinavia.  VII. — Planting  of  the  Church  among 
the  Slavs.  VIII. — Efforts  to  convert  the  Moham- 
medans.     IX. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  XIII 

Separation  of  the  Roman  and  Greek  Churches   .      265 

Outline:  I. — Relation  of  the  Greek  and  Roman 
Churches  before  325.  II. — Effect  of  the  Arian  Contro- 
versy on  the  situation.  III. — The  history  of  image 
worship.  IV. — Character  and  results  of  the  Icon- 
oclastic Controversy.  V. — Final  separation.  VI. — Re- 
semblances and  differences  between  the  two  churches. 
VII. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  XIV 

Relation  of  the  Church  and  State  up  to  the  Dis- 
solution of  the  Carolingian  Empire     .  .     289 

Outline:  I. — Church  and  state  before  Constantine. 
II. — Church  and  state  from  Constantine  to  476.  III. — 
Period  of  the  Ostrogothic  rule  (476-552).  IV.— -Re- 
union of  Italy  with  the  Eastern  Empire.  V. — Alliance 
between  the  Papacy  and  the  Franks.  VI. — Restora- 
tion of  the  Empire  in  the  West  in  800.  VII. — Effect  of 
the  rise  of  national  states  on  the  Church.  VIII. — 
Sources. 


xii  Contents 


CHAPTER  XV 

The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals  and  the  Papal 
Constitution    .  .  .  .  .  .         .326 

Outline:  I. — What  were  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  De- 
cretals? II. — Condition  of  Europe  when  the  Decretals 
appeared.  III. — Purpose  of  the  forgery.  IV. — Char- 
acter and  composition.  V. — Time,  place,  and  personal- 
ity of  authorship.  VI. — Significance  and  results.  VII. 
Nicholas  I.  and  papal  supremacy.  VIII. — Decline  of 
spirituality  in  the  Church.     IX. — Sources. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

Organisation,    Life,    and   Institutions   of  the 

Church,  Sixth  to  Ninth  Century     .  .  .     347 

Outline  :  I. — Organisation  of  the  papal  hierarchy. 
II. — Moral  condition  of  the  clergy  and  laity.  III. — • 
Great  activity  and  wide  influence  of  the  Church.  IV. — 
The  ordeals  and  the  Church.  V. — Church  discipline  : 
excommunication  and  interdict,  and  penance.  VI. — 
Worship;  the  mass;  preaching;  hymns.  VII. — The 
sacraments.     VIII. — Relics  and  saints.     IX. — Sources. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

The  Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy     .  .384 

Outline:  I. — Decline  of  the  Empire  under  the  later 
Carolingians.  II. — Preparations  to  restore  the  Em- 
pire on  a  German  basis.  III. — Otto  the  Great  creates 
the  Holy  Roman  Empire.  IV. — Holy  Roman  Em- 
pire attains  .its  height  under  Henry  III.  V. — Results 
of  the  creation  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire.  VI. — 
Sources. 

CHAPTER  XVIII 

Preparations  for  the  Hildebrandine  Reforma- 
tion ........     418 

Outline:  I. — Decline  of  the  Papacy  after  Nicholas  I. 
(858-867).  II. — Reform  efforts  before  the  time  of 
Hildebrand.  III. — The  youth  and  education  of  Hilde- 
brand.     IV. — The  Hildebrandine  Popes.      V. — Sources. 


Contents  xiii 


CHAPTER  XIX 

Gregory  VII.  and  his  Work  ....     445 

Outline:  I. — Condition  of  the  Church  in  1073.  II. — 
Election  of  Hildebrand  as  Pope.  III. — Gregory  VII. 's 
matured  papal  theory  and  reform  ideas.  IV. — His  ef- 
forts to  realise  his  ideals.  V. — The  investiture  strife. 
VI. — Conclusions.     VII. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  XX 

The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      .  .  .     476 

Outline:  I. — The  rise  and  spread  of  Mohammedan- 
ism. II. — Positive  and  negative  causes  of  the  Crusades. 
III. — Character  and  description  of  the  Crusades.  IV. — 
Results  and  influences  of  the  Crusades.     V. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  XXI 

Rise  of  the  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church      .     510 

Outline:  I. — Monasticism  before  the  Crusades.  II. 
— Effect  of  the  Crusades  on  monasticism.  III. — Origin 
of  the  begging  orders.  IV. — Rise  and  influence  of  the 
Dominicans.  V. — Origin  and  power  of  the  Franciscans. 
VI. — Wide-spread  results  of  mediaeval  monasticism. 
VII. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  XXII 

Innocent  III.  and  the  Church  at  its  Height     .     544 

Outline  :  I. — Antecedent  preparation  for  this  period. 
II. — Career  of  Innocent  III.  up  to  1 198.  III. — Innocent 
III.'s  plans  and  ideals  as  Pope.  IV. — Condition  of 
Europe  at  the  close  of  the  twelfth  century.  V. — Inno- 
cent III.  makes  himself  the  political  head  of  Europe.  VI. 
— Innocent  III.'s  efforts  to  root  out  heresy  and  reform 
the  Church.  VII. — Innocent  III.'s  character  and  the 
general  results  of  his  pontificate.     VIII. — Sources. 

CHAPTER  XXIII 

The  Medieval  Church  at  its  Height    .  .  .     569 

Outline:  I. — Characteristics  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury. II. — Territorial  extent  and  wealth  of  the  Church. 
III. — Organisation  of  the  papal  hierarchy  completed. 
IV. — The  legal  system  of  the  Church.  V. — The  official 
language  and  ritual  of  the  Church.  VI. — The  sacra- 
mental system.  VII. — The  employment  of  art.  VIII. 
— The  Church  moulded  the  civilisation  of  Europe.  IX. 
— Sources. 

Index  ........     607 


THE  RISE  OF  THE 
MEDIEVAL  CHURCH 


CHAPTER  I 

THE    STUDY    OF    CHURCH    HISTORY1 

Outline:  I. — Present  status  of  history  in  college  work.  II. — 
Ecclesiastical  history  excluded  since  the  Reformation  by  politi- 
cal history.  III. — New  view  of  the  mediaeval  Church  and  its 
influence.  IV. — Renaissance  of  interest  in  Church  history.  V. — 
Pedagogical  value  and  treatment  of  Church  history.    VI. — Sources 

HALF  a  century  ago  a  prominent  educator  ob- 
served: "There  is  something  remarkable  in 
the  actual  condition  of  the  study  of  Church 
history.  While  it  seems  to  be  receiving  more  and 
more  cultivation  from  a  few  of  us,  it  fails  to  command 
the  attention  of  the  educated  public  in  the  same  pro- 
portion. We  are  strongly  of  the  opinion  that  beyond 
the  requisitions  of  academical  and  professional  examin- 
ation there  is  very  little  reading  of  Church  history  in 
any  way."2  Only  twenty-five  years  ago  Professor 
Emerton,  upon  taking  the  chair  of  ecclesiastical  history 
in  Harvard  University,  could  say  with  truth:  "There 

«  Reprinted  from  The  Methodist  Review,  Jan.,  1905. 
*  Bib.  Rep.,  vol.  xxvi. 

1 


The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


are  to-day  not  more  than  half  a  dozen  colleges  in  the 
country  where  any  adequate  provision  for  an  inde- 
pendent department  of  history  has  been  made. "  1  At 
the  present  time,  happily,  the  condition  so  much  de- 
plored in  the  last  quotation  has  been  remedied  to  a 
very  large  degree.  Every  great  university  in  America 
has  a  well-organised  faculty  of  history  and  allied  sub- 
jects, while  a  large  majority  of  the  smaller  institutions 
of  higher  education  have  regularly  organised  depart- 
ments of  history  with  instructors,  well-trained  at 
home  or  abroad,  who  devote  all  their  time  to  the 
subject. 

But,  notwithstanding  these  facts,  the  statement 
made  about  Church  history  still  remains  essentially 
true.  The  political,  industrial,  educational,  and  social 
sides  of  history  have  been  emphasised  by  the  creation 
of  new  departments  with  new  courses  of  study,  and  by 
the  writing  of  many  text-books,  monographs,  and 
general  treatises.  Professorships  of  sociology,  political 
economy,  political  science,  constitutional  law,  educa- 
tion, and  literature  have  been  created  in  unprecedented 
numbers.  Ecclesiastical  history,  on  the  contrary,  has 
been  all  but  ignored.  Even  in  Germany,  where  the 
greatest  strides  have  been  made  in  the  subject,  it  is 
still  relegated  to  the  theological  faculty,  though  the 
number  of  philosophical  students  selecting  it  often 
exceeds  that  of  the  theological — a  very  significant 
fact.  In  America  it  would  be  difficult  to  point  out 
more  than  a  very  few  universities  or  colleges  where  a 
chair  in  Church  history  is  put  on  an  equality  with 
chairs  of  other  branches  of  history  or  of  correlated 
subjects.  Its  proper  place,  in  both  scholastic  and 
popular   estimation,    is   in   the   theological   seminary, 

1  Unit.  Rev.,  vol.  xix. 


The  Study  of  Church  History 


and  there  it  has  always  remained  as  a  "professional" 
study.  Even  in  this  restricted  sense,  however,  its 
intrinsic  worth  has  placed  it  among  the  most  important 
courses  in  the  curriculum,  and  has  given  it  a  standing 
beyond  "professional"  circles.  Some  of  America's 
greatest  scholars  have  contributed  powerfully,  through 
the  class-room,  lectures,  and  books,  to  give  Church 
history  its  rightful  place  both  as  a  "professional"  and 
as  a  "liberal"   branch  of  learning. 

Until  Luther  led  the  great  reformatory  schism  in 
the  sixteenth  century,  all  historians,  crude  and  un- 
scientific though  much  of  their  work  was,  recognised 
the  necessary  union  of  political  and  ecclesiastical  his-  / 
tory.  The  Venerable  Bede  began  his  celebrated  history 
not  with  the  coming  of  Abbot  Augustine  and  his  monks, 
but  with  the  landing  of  Caesar  and  his  Roman  cohorts. 
As  modem  civilisation  crept  over  western  Europe  and 
crossed  the  mighty  deep  to  Columbia's  shores,  carrying 
with  it  the  revolutionising  Teutonic  conception  of  the 
national  state  with  its  new  duties  and  relationships, 
the  tendency  was  to  magnify  the  political  and  social 
sides  of  history  at  the  expense  of  the  religious.  The 
hatreds  and  misunderstandings  of  the  Reformation, 
though  doing  something  to  rectify  the  "orthodox" 
history  of  the  old  Church,  really  put  members  of  the 
old  organisation  wholly  on  the  defensive,  and  checked 
for  centuries  anything  like  a  genuinely  sympathetic 
and  scientific  study  of  the  old  Church  by  Protestant 
historians.  With  Neander,  that  sympathetic  Christian 
of  Jewish  descent,  and  the  scholarly  Gieseler,  a  new  era 
opened.  The  growing  doctrine  of  the  separation  of  <c. 
Church  and  state  accentuated  the  breach  between  po- 
litical and  religious  history.  The  early  crude  concep- 
tion of  specialisation  also  separated  sacred  from  profane 


The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


history,  and  turned  the  former  over  wholly  to  the 
theologian.  Secular  historians  took  the  position  of 
Napoleon  when  invited  to  enter  the  Holy  City:  "Jeru- 
salem does  not  enter  into  the  line  of  my  operations." 

At  last  the  Church  historian  and  the  civic  historian 
have  joined  hands,  and  look  each  other  in  the  face. 
They  see  that  their  aim  is  essentially  common:  to 
know  the  truth  about  the  past.  This  search  for  truth 
for  its  own  sake  is  purely  modern — almost  contem- 
poraneous. Formerly,  history  was  written  to  justify 
or  disprove  some  theory  of  political  or  ecclesiastical 
polity,  or  to  glorify  some  dynasty,  sect,  party,  or 
hero,  or  to  vindicate  some  hypothesis  or  set  of  ideas. 
The  historian  was  not  a.  searcher  for  truth,  but  a 
lawyer  with  a  cause  to  plead.  It  is  generally  realised 
now  that  the  historian,  whether  he  deals  with  the 
state,  the  Church,  society,  education,  or  industry,  is 
working  an  important  part  of  the  field  of  general  his- 
tory. A  knowledge  of  each  one  of  these  institutions 
is  necessary  to  supplement  and  explain  any  or  all  of 
the  others. 

This  institutional  interdependence  seems  to  be  gen- 
erally recognised  now.  "The  web  of  history,"  said 
Professor  Hatch  in  beginning  his  great  work  at  Oxford, 
"is  woven  of  one  piece;  it  reflects  the  unity  of  human 
life,  of  which  it  is  the  record.  We  cannot  isolate  any 
group  of  facts  and  consider  that  no  links  of  causation 
connect  them  with  their  predecessors  or  their  con- 
temporaries. Just  as  Professor  Freeman  insists  on 
the  continuity  of  history,  so  I  wish  to  insist  on  its 
solidarity. " 1     The  mutual  labours  of  scholars  in  cor- 

•  Hatch,  An  Introductory  Lecture  on  the  Study  of  Ecclesiastical 
History,  London,  1885.  Comp.  Gwatkin,  The  Meaning  of  Ecclesi- 
astical History,  Cambridge,  1891. 


The  Study  of  Church  History 


relating  fields  have  revolutionised  our  historical  know- 
ledge of  the  early  and  later  Middle  Ages.  A  multitude 
of  controverted  points  have  vanished  like  ghosts.  . 
We  see  the  old  Church  now  as  we  never  saw  it  before. 
The  Catholic  Church  and  the  mediaeval  papacy  were 
the  greatest  of  the  creations  of  the  first  fifteen  centuries 
of  the  Christian  era.  The  mediaeval  Church  was  not 
exclusively  a  religious  organisation.  It  was  more  of 
an  ecclesiastical  state.  It  had  laws,  lawyers,  courts, 
and  prisons.  If  not  born  into  it,  all  the  people  of 
western  Europe  were  at  least  baptised  into  it.  It 
levied  taxes  on  its  subjects.  Standards  of  patriotism 
and  treason  were  more  sharply  defined  than  in  the 
modern  state. *  The  evolution  of  this  great  organisation 
is  the  central  fact  of  the  first  thirteen  centuries  after 
Christ.  It  aimed  to  control  the  whole  life  of  its  sub- 
jects here  and  to  determine  their  destiny  hereafter. 
Well  may  our  greatest  American  Church  historian, 
Henry  C.  Lea,  ask:  "What  would  have  been  the  con- 
dition of  the  world  if  that  organisation  had  not  suc- 
ceeded in  bearing  the  ark  of  Christianity  through  the 
wilderness  of  the  first  fifteen  centuries?"2 

The  history  of  Europe,  then,  after  the  Roman  period 
must  be  looked  at  through  the  eyes  of  the  Church. 
The  character  and  works  of  that  great  institution  must 
first  be  studied,  not  pathologically  but  sympathetically. 
The  historian,  if  honest,  dare  not  show  a  "lack  of  ap- 
preciation of  the  service  rendered  to  humanity  by  the 
organisation  which  in  all  ages  has  assumed  for  itself 
the  monopoly  of  the  heritage  of  Christ."3  He  must 
recognise  the  fact  that  ' '  ecclesiastical  history  is  simply 

i  Maitland,    Canon  Law  in   the   Church   of    England,     London, 


98,  100,  101. 

3  Lea,  Studies  in  Church  History,  p.  iii. 

» Ibid. 


The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  spiritual  side  of  universal  history."1  "The  value 
of  a  science  depends  on  its  own  intrinsic  merits,"  says 
Alzog. 2  When  the  great  Teacher  commanded  from 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  "Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and 
preach  the  gospel,"  that  mount  became  the  pivot  on 
which  the  whole  world's  history  has  turned. 

If  the  Christian  religion  be  a  matter,  not  of  mint,  anise, 
and  cummin,  but  of  justice,  mercy,  and  truth;  if  the  Christ- 
ian religion  be  not  a  priestly  caste,  or  a  monastic  order, 
or  a  little  sect,  or  a  handful  of  opinions,  but  the  whole 
congregation  of  faithful  men  dispersed  throughout  the 
world ;  if  the  very  word  which  of  old  represented  the  chosen 
"people"  is  now  to  be  found  in  the  "laity" ;  if  the  biblical 
usage  of  the  phrase  "ecclesia"  literally  justifies  Tertullian's 
definition:  Ubi  tres  sunt  laid,  ibi  est  ecclesia;  then  the  range 
of  the  history  of  the  Church  is  as  wide  as  the  range  of 
the  world  which  it  was  designed  to  penetrate.  3 

The  great  difficulty  with  the  study  of  Church  history 
in  the  past  has  been  that  teachers  treated  it  wholly 
from  a  theological  standpoint.  That  may  have  been 
proper  when  the  subject  was  viewed  as  a  narrow  "pro- 
fessional "  study  only.  A  new  and  better  conception 
of  the  subject,  however,  as  a  part  of  the  pregnant  his- 
tory of  humanity,  has  brought  with  it  a  higher  esti- 
mation of  its  value  as  a  cultural  study.  All  that  can 
be  claimed  for  historical  studies  in  general  can  be 
claimed  for  it:  mental  discipline,  broad  culture,  a  view 
of  practical  life,  enlarged  sympathies  and  lessened  preju- 
dices, a  truer  conception  of  duty,  and  a  saner  estimate 
of  the  significance  of  current  events.  In  addition  it 
may  be  ventured  that  no  subject  can  be  of  greater 

1  Gwatkin,  The  Meaning  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  8. 

2  Alzog,  Universal  Church  History,  i.,  §  13. 

3  Stanley,  Eastern  Church,  Introduction,  25. 


The  Study  of  Church  History  7 

vital  importance  to  the  student  for  the  very  reason  that 
it  deals  with  the  most  important  of  all  subjects.  In 
order  to  do  the  most  good  as  a  liberal  branch  of  learn- 
ing, Church  history  must  be  taught  not  as  theology 
or  dogma,  but  as  a  powerful  civilising  institution  like 
the  state  or  the  school.  Then  it  will  be  true  that 
"neither  can  the  profane  historian,  the  jurist,  the 
statesman,  the  man  of  letters,  the  artist,  nor  the 
philosopher  safely  neglect  the  study  of  Church  his- 
tory. " l  For  each  one  of  these  persons,  as  well  as  the 
minister,  needs  that  "pragmatic  view"  of  all  the 
changes  and  developments  of  the  Christian  Church 
and  the  influence  it  has  exerted  on  all  other  human 
relations. 2 

Within  the  last  few  years,  however,  there  has  been 
a  noticeable  awakening  of  interest  in  Church  history 
both  within  and  without  college  walls.  The  inde- 
fatigable labours  of  a  few  men  like  Henry  C.  Lea,  who 
has  given  us  a  series  of  invaluable  monographs  on  the 
history  of  the  old  Church,  have  had  much  to  do  with 
the  new  status  of  Church  history.  Universities  are 
already  recognising  courses  in  Church  history  offered 
by  divinity  schools  as  "liberal  arts"  electives  for 
undergraduate  and  postgraduate  study.  The  writers 
of  recent  text-books  on  general  history,  as  well  as  in 
particular  fields,  recognise  the  revolution  and  try  to 
make  amends  for  the  sin  of  omission  by  giving  the 
Church  a  prominence  never  recognised  before  by 
secular  historians.3  Publishers  have  felt  the  popular 
pulse   and,   consequently,    "Studies"   and   "Epochs" 

1  Alzog,  i.,  32. 

J  Gieseler,  Ecclesiastical  History,  sec.  3  and  7. 

3  Examine  recently  published  texts  like  Emerton,  Mediaeval 
Europe;  Robinson,  History  of  Western  Europe;  Munro,  A  History 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  etc. 


8        The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


covering  the  whole  range  of  Church  history  have  ap- 
peared in  cheap  and  popular  form  from  the  pen  of 
scholar  and  compiler.  Foreign  works  have  been  trans- 
lated. Journals  devoted  to  the  study  of  Church 
history  have  been  established.  Lectureships  have 
been  created  and  endowed.  Societies  have  been 
organised  to  further  the  work.  Convenient  editions 
of  the  "sources"  are  appearing.  Everywhere  there 
seems  to  be  a  reaction  in  favour  of  this  misunderstood 
and  neglected  subject.  An  army  of  scholars  is  at  work 
digging  valuable  material  out  of  old  monasteries,  royal 
archives,  private  libraries,  cemeteries  and  churches, 
catacombs,  and  every  conceivable  place  of  conceal- 
ment. These  labours  are  being  rewarded  by  rich  dis- 
coveries of  valuable  materials,  which  are  immediately 
critically  edited  by  competent  hands  and  printed  in 
translations  suitable  for  all  students.  Huge  collec- 
tions of  these  sources  are  appearing  in  most  of  the 
European  countries. 1 

The  most  significant  evidence  of  reaction,  however, 
lies  in  the  fact  that  the  most  recent  courses  offered  on 
the  Middle  Ages  in  our  leading  universities  are  essen- 
tially courses  in  Church  history.  The  name  matters 
little  so  long  as  students  approach  the  instructive 
history  of  western  Europe  from  the  right  standpoint. 
Thus,  at  length,  has  come  the  fulfilment  of  the  pro- 
phecy of  Professor  Koethe  (d.  1850),  made  many  years 
ago:  "It  is  reserved  to  future  ages,  and  in  a  special 
sense  to  the  institutions  of  learning,  to  give  to  Church 
history  its  proper  place  in  the  curriculum  of  studies. 
When  its  nature  and  importance  come  to  be  fully 
known  and  appreciated  it  will  be  no  longer  limited  to 
one  faculty." 

1  The  Monutnenta  in  Germany,  the  Rolls  Series  in  England,  etc. 


The  Study  of  Church  History  9 

The  best  pedagogical  methods  must  be  applied  to 
Church  history  in  order  to  obtain  the  best  results.  To 
that  end  these  practical  suggestions  are  offered: 

1.  Emphasis  ought  to  be  laid  on  ideas  back  of  events 
rather  than  on  the  events  themselves. 

2.  The  important  ought  to  be  distinguished  from 
the  unimportant  at  every  step.  Athanasius  and  Augus- 
tine are  worthier  subjects  of  study  than  Flavian  and 
Optatus.  The  invasion  and  conversion  of  the  Teutons 
are  more  important  than  disputes  over  Easter  or  the 
shape  of  the  tonsure. 

3.  Original  sources  ought  to  be  used  so  far  as  possible. 
History  should  be  studied  "from  the  sources  of  friend 
and  foe,  in  the  spirit  of  truth  and  love,  sine  ira  et 
studio. " i 

4.  Both  Protestant  and  Catholic  secondary  author- 
ities ought  to  be  read  on  every  important  controverted 
point. 

5.  Origins  ought  to  be  studied  with  special  care. 

6.  Transition  periods  rather  than  crises  ought  to  be 
given  the  most  time. 

7.  Biographies  of  epoch-making  men  like  Constan- 
tine,  Gregory  the  Great,  Charlemagne,  Hildebrand, 
St.  Francis,  Innocent  III.,  etc.,  ought  to  be  carefully 
considered. 

8.  Causes  and  results  ought  to  be  closely  worked  out 
and  classified. 2 

9.  The  continuity  of  the  Church  as  a  great  force  in 
the  world  ought  to  be  ever  kept  in  mind.  3 

10.  Differentiation  ought  to  be  thoughtfully  noted 
through  the  ages. 

1  Schaff,  Church  History,  preface. 

2  Mace,  Method  in  History,  27-39. 

» Freeman,  Methods  of  Historical  Study,  Lond.  and  N.  Y..  1886. 


io      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


1 1 .  The  unity  of  history — the  influence  of  the  Church 
upon  every  other  institution — ought  to  be  followed 
from  one  transitional  period  to  another. 

12.  The  sympathetic  attitude  ought  to  be  taken 
at  all  times  in  judging  men  and  movements.  The 
student  ought  to  stand  in  the  centre  of  the  circle 
so  that  he  may  see  all  points  of  the  circumference 
— all  persons,  all  events,  all  parties,  all  creeds,  all 
sects,  all  shades  of  opinion — and  see  their  true  his- 
torical relations. 

Sources 

i. — Bright,  W.,  The  Study  of  Church  History.  In  Way- 
marks  of  Church  History.     N.  Y.,  1894. 

2. — Cave,  A.,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Theology.  Edinb. , 
1885,  421  ff. 

3. — Collins,  W.  E.,  The  Study  of  Ecclesiastical  History. 
N.  Y.,  1903. 

4. — Coxe,  A.  C.,  Institutes  of  Christian  History.  Chicago, 
1887. 

5. — De  Witt,  J.,  Church  History  as  a  Science,  as  a  Theo- 
logical Discipline,  and  as  a  Mode  of  the  Gospel.  Cine, 
1883. 

6. — Foster,  F.  H.,  The  Seminary  Method  of  Original  Study 
in  the  Historical  Sciences.     N.  Y.,  1888. 

7. — Gwatkin,  H.  M.,  The  Meaning  of  Ecclesiastical  History. 
Camb.,  1 89 1. 

8. — Hatch,  E.,  An  Introductory  Lecture  on  the  Study  of 
Ecclesiastical  History.     Lond.,  1885. 

9. — Hitchcock,  R.  D.     The  True  Idea  and  Uses  of  Church 
History.     N.  Y.,  1856. 
10. — Jortin,  J.,  The  Use  and  Importance  of  Ecclesiastical 

History.     Works,  vii.,  405-454.     Lond.,  1772. 
11. — Lea,  H.  C,  Studies  in  Church  History.     Introd.     Phil., 

1869. 
12.— McGiffert,   A.    C,    "The   Historical  Study  of  Chris- 
tianity."    Bibliotheca  Sacra,  Jan.,  1893,  1 50-1 71. 
13. — Robinson,   J.    H.,   Sacred  and  Profane   History.     In 

An.  Rep.  Am.  Hist.  Assn.     1899,  i.,  527. 
14. — Smith,  H.   B.,    "  Nature  and  Worth  of  the  Science  of 


The  Study  of  Church  History  n 

Church  History."  Bibliotheca Sacra,  vol.  vii.,  1851,  412. 

See  Faith  and  Philosophy ,  Edinb.  andN.Y.,  1877,  49-86. 
15. — Smyth,  E.  C,  Value  of  the  Study  of  Church  History  in 

Ministerial  Education.     Andover,  1874. 
16. — Stanley,   A.    P.,    Three   Introductory   Lectures  on   the 

Study   of   Ecclesiastical   History.      In   History   of   the 

Eastern  Church.     Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  1884,  17-76. 

See  the  introductions  of  the  Church  histories  of  Schaff, 
Gieseler,  Alzog,  Moeller,  Kurtz,  Hase,  Dollinger,  and 
Hergenrother. 


CHAPTER  II 

GENERAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY  ON  CHURCH  HISTORY 

Outline:  I. — Primary  materials.  II. — Secondary  materials. 
III. — Sketch  of  the  "writing  of  Church  history.  IV. — Most  impor- 
tant collections  of  primary  sources.  V. — Most  important  general 
Church  histories.  VI. — Dictionaries  and  encyclopedias.  VII. — 
Atlases  and  chronologies.     VIII. — Text-books.     IX. — Sources. 

ALL  our  information  about  the  origin,  life,  and 
growth  of  the  Christian  Church  comes  from 
the  revelation  of  evidence  which  is  termed 
sources.  These  sources  are  partly  original,  or  primary, 
and  partly  secondary.  For  the  student  of  history 
both  kinds  of  sources  have  a  definite  character  and 
value,  and  are,  therefore,  of  peculiar  interest.  Some 
knowledge  about  the  scope  and  nature  of  the  sources  is 
necessary  for  an  intelligent  view  of  any  field  of  history. 
At  the  same  time  it  is  clear  that  any  person  presuming 
to  pose  as  an  authority  on  a  given  phase  of  history 
must  not  only  be  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the 
varied  contributions  of  all  secondary  works,  but  must 
also  be  a  master  of  the  character  and  worth  of  all  first- 
hand materials. 

The  primary  sources  are  simply  the  records  and 
remains  left  by  the  people  who  lived  at  any  given  time. 
Such  materials,  it  will  be  readily  seen,  give  the  nearest 
and  truest  account  of  the  ideas,  feelings,  motives,  and 
beliefs,  as  well  as  of  the  deeds  and  actions,  of  man. 
An  original  source  is,  therefore,  merely  a  source  back 


General  Bibliography  13 


of  which  one  cannot  go  for  historical  information. 
It  is  apparent,  consequently,  that  the  primary  sources 
are  the  more  important  because  they  are  the  very  foun- 
dations of  history.  "No  documents,  no  history," 
tersely  declared  Langlois.  The  primary  sources  put 
us  in  vital  connection  with  the  thoughts,  doings,  and 
institutions  of  past  times.  In  them  one  sees  reflected 
the  spirit  of  the  age.  Every  line,  every  word,  is  a 
revelation.  The  student  is  led  to  feel  history,  to 
actually  know  men  and  women  of  the  past,  and  thus 
to  comprehend  our  own  civilisation  in  the  earlier 
periods  of  its  evolution.  The  primary  sources  cannot 
be  accepted  and  assigned  their  true  value,  however, 
until  their  authenticity  and  genuineness  are  deter- 
mined, and  the  element  of  personal  equation  is  taken 
into  account.  Even  then  final  judgment  can  never 
be  absolute. 

For  the  sake  of  giving  a  clear  conception  of  the 
range  of  the  primary  sources  the  following  classification 
may  be  of  assistance: 

A. — Written  sources  of  the  subjoined  kind : 
I. — Public  official  documents: 

1.  Acts  of  councils  and  synods. 

2.  Letters,  bulls,  briefs,  rescripts,  and  regests 

of  popes,  patriarchs,  and  bishops. 

3.  Confessions  of  faith. 

4.  Liturgies,  hymns,  etc. 

5 .  Church  canons  and  laws ,  and  monastic  rules . 

6 .  Decrees  and  letters  of  kings ,  nobles ,  and  civic 

assemblies. 

7.  Laws  of  states. 

II. — Private  writings  of   personal  actors  and  ob- 
servers : 


1 4         The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


i.     The  Apostles. 

2.     Church  fathers. 

3.     Heretics  and  reformers. 

4.     Heathen. 

5.     Chroniclers  and  historians. 

6.     Missionaries. 

7.     Clergy  and  laity. 

III. 

— Inscriptions    on    churches,    public    buildings 

tombs,  monuments,  coins,  seals,  etc. 

B.— 

Unwritten  sources  of  the  following  character: 

L- 

—Buildings : 

1.     Churches  and  baptisteries. 

2.     Tombs  and  monuments. 

3.     Civic  edifices. 

4.     Private  dwellings. 

II.- 

—Art: 

1.     Sculpture — images  and  emblems. 

2.     Painting  and  fresco. 

3.     Mosaics. 

4.     Ecclesiastical  vestments  and  ornaments. 

5.     Church  furniture  and  vessels. 

III. 

— Rites  and  ceremonies. 

IV. 

— Oral  traditions. 

The  secondary  sources  are  those  that  are  compiled 
from  a  study  of  the  original  sources,  or  from  other 
secondary  works,  or  from  both,  as  is  more  likely  to  be 
the  case.  This  class  of  material  is  very  abundant,  and 
varies  greatly  in  character  and  value  because  of  the 
striking  difference  in  authorship,  style,  and  purpose. 
It  is  always  necessary,  therefore,  carefully  to  discrimin- 
ate the  wheat  from  the  chaff  and  to  be  able  easily  to 
recognise  the  "earmarks"  of  a  reliable  authority. 
Many   of   the   works   produced   by   modern   scientific 


General  Bibliography  15 


scholarship  are  excellent  in  every  respect,  and,  in  many 
fields  of  historical  study,  absolutely  indispensable. 
Secondary  sources  may  be  divided  as  follows : 

A. — Written  works: 
I. — History: 

1 .  General  treatises  based  upon  either  primary 

sources,  or  secondary  materials,  or  both. 

2.  Encyclopedias  and  dictionaries. 

3.  Monographs,  essays,  and  articles. 

II. — Fiction: 

1.  Novels. 

2 .  Poetry. 

3.  Drama. 
B. — Unwritten : 

I. — Oral  traditions  and  reports. 
II. — Transmitted  rites  and  ceremonies. 
III. — Works  of  art  copied  from  originals 

The  earliest  account  of  the  history  of  the  Christian 
Church  extant  is  the  New  Testament.  The  ' '  Memoirs ' ' 
of  Hegesippus,  a  converted  Jew  of  the  second  century, 
is  the  first  known  effort  to  record  the  growth  of  the 
Church,  but  all  his  books  are  lost. !  Eusebius,  the 
Greek  bishop,  called  the  "Father  of  Church  history," 
wrote  a  comprehensive  Ecclesiastical  History  to  324. 
Socrates,  Sozomen,  and  Theodoret,  each  after  his 
own  ideal,  continued  the  narrative  of  Eusebius. 
Rufinus  translated  the  work  of  Eusebius  into  Latin 
and  continued  it  to  395,  while  Epiphanius  translated 
Socrates,  Sozomen,  and  Theodoret  into  Latin  and 
brought  the  record  to  518.  Theodorus  and  Evagrius 
were   also   continuators   of  these   early   works.      Sul- 

1  Extracts  in  Eusebius,  Ecclesiastical  History  and  in  Ante-Nic. 
Ch.  Fathers  (Chr.  Lit.  ed.),  viii.,  762. 


1 6       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


picius  Severus,  a  Gallic  monk  of  noble  birth,  penned  a 
fabulous  chronicle  of  little  worth. 

The  Middle  Ages  produced  little  of  real  value  in  the 
field  of  Church  history.  The  chronicles  represent  the 
best  output.  A  few  scholars  of  the  Eastern  Church, 
the  Byzantine  historians,  the  annalists  of  the  Latin 
Church,  and  several  specialists  like  Gregory  of  Tours 
and  the  Venerable  Bede,  complete  the  list.  The  lives 
of  saints,  however,  abound. 

The  fierce  controversial  spirit  of  the  Reformation 
produced  two  monumental  works.  Matthias  Flacius, 
aided  by  other  Protestant  scholars,  in  the  Magdeburg 
Centuries,  sought  to  reveal  the  whole  disreputable 
career  of  the  old  Church.  This  keen  voluminous  work 
of  the  Reformers  called  forth  from  the  learned  Italian, 
Baronius,  a  powerful  defence  of  the  Roman  Church  in 
his  Ecclesiastical  Annals.  Bossuet,  a  Frenchman,  in 
his  Discourse  on  Universal  History,  made  a  severe  attack 
on  Protestantism,  while  Tillemont,  a  Gallic  nobleman 
of  Jansenist  faith,  wrote  critically  and  with  more 
moderation.  In  Germany,  Hottinger,  Spanheim,  and 
Arnold  vindicated  the  Reformation.  Following  the 
earlier  age  of  fierce  theological  controversy,  Semler, 
Henke,  Schmidt,  Hume,  and  Gibbon  wrote  in  a  very 
rationalistic  style  and  spirit. 

During  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries, 
German  scholars  have  led  the  world  in  their  contribu- 
tions to  Church  history.  The  great  Mosheim  made 
a  pronounced  improvement  in  the  writing  of  Church 
history  and  introduced  the  modern  scientific  method. 
He  was  not  alone  the  most  learned  theologian  of  his 
age  in  Germany,  but  was  critical  in  the  best  sense, 
honest  and  impartial.  His  disciple,  Schroeckh,  wrote 
a  work  of  forty-five  volumes  of  considerable    value. 


General  Bibliography  17 


Gieseler  improved  on  Mosheim's  method  and  wrote 
an  ideal  outline  of  Church  history  with  full  citations  to 
all  the  known  sources.  Neander,  "a  giant  in  learning, 
and  a  saint  in  piety,"  gave  the  world  an  epoch-making 
General  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church 
(1825-52).  His  writings  and  his  ideals  have  influenced 
nearly  every  Church  historian  since  his  death,  when 
it  was  said,  "The  last  of  the  Church  Fathers  has  gone." 
Among  his  immediate  pupils  are  Hagenbach,  Kurtz, 
Guericke,  Niedner,  and  Semisch. 

Baur  founded  the  celebrated  "Tubingen  School" 
and  did  some  excellent  work  in  the  Ante-Nicene  period. 
Strauss,  Zeller,  Schenkel,  Rothe,  and  Nippold  are  the 
most  prominent  among  his  followers. 

The  names  of  other  German  historians  who  have 
laboured  in  this  domain  of  knowledge  are  so  numer- 
ous that  only  a  few  of  the  most  prominent  will  be 
mentioned.  Chief  among  the  Protestants  are  Hase, 
Gfroerer,  Ebrard,  Herzog,  Moeller,  Muller,  Loofs, 
Hauck,  and  Harnack;  among  the  Roman  Catholic 
writers  are  Stolberg,  Katerkamp,  Dollinger,  Alzog, 
Pastor,  Hefele,  Hergenrother  and  Janssen. 

Although  British  scholarship  has  not  devoted  itself 
so  zealously  to  the  writing  of  Church  history,  yet  some 
excellent  contributions  have  been  made  by  such  men 
as  Pusey,  Keble,  Newman,  Waddington,  Milman,  Stan- 
ley, Stubbs,  Robertson,  Greenwood,  Vaughan,  Perry, 
Lingard,  Creighton,  Gwatkin,  Tozer,  Hatch,  and  Orr. 

American  interest  in  the  field  of  Church  history  is 
largely  the  product  of  the  last  thirty  years.  Most  con- 
spicuous among  the  contributors  are  Smith,  Lanson, 
Shedd,  Schaff,  Fisher,  Sheldon,  Dryer,  Hurst,  New- 
man, McGiffert,  and  Henry  C.  Lea. 

At  the  present  time  in  every  Christian  country  a 


1 8       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


corps  of  well-trained  scholars  are  devoting  their  lives 
to  nearly  every  phase  of  Church  history,  and  the  out- 
look is  most  gratifying. 

The  literature  on  Church  history,  taken  as  a  whole, 
is  perhaps  more  voluminous  than  that  on  any  other 
phase  of  history.  The  use  of  the  sources  is,  in  con- 
sequence, at  the  very  outset  a  problem  of  selection. 
It  is  apparent,  therefore,  that  the  following  brief  lists 
are  not  meant  to  be  exhaustive.  Only  the  most  valu- 
able collections  of  original  documents,  and  also  the 
most  reliable  books  of  a  secondary  character  are 
included.  Special  care  has  been  taken  to  mention  all 
useful  collections  of  sources  in  the  English  language. 
At  the  conclusion  of  each  chapter  will  be  found  refer- 
ences to  the  sources  on  special  topics. 

The   Most   Important   Collections   of   Primary 
Sources  Are: 

A. — Official  Documents: 
I. — In  English: 

i. — Brett,  T.,  Collection  of  the  Principal  Liturgies. 
Lond.,  1838. 

2. — Fulton,  J.,  Index  Canonum.     N.  Y.,  1892. 

3. — Gee,  H.,  and  Hardy,  W.  J.,  Documents  Illus- 
trative of  English  Church  History.  N.  Y., 
1896. 

4. — Hammond,  C.  E.,  Liturgies,  Eastern  and 
Western.     Lond.,  1878. 

5. — Henderson,  E.  F.,  Select  Historical  Docu- 
ments of  the  Middle  Ages.  Lond.  and  N.  Y., 
1892. 

6. — Neale,  J.  M.,  The  Liturgies  of  St.  Mark,  St. 
James,  St.  Clement,  St.  Chrysostom,  and  St. 
Basil.     2  vols.     Lond.,  1859. 

7. — Neale,  J.  M.,  and  Webb,  B.,  The  Symbolism  of 


General  Bibliography  19 


Churches  and  Church  Ornaments.     Lond.  and 
N.  Y.,  1893. 
8. — Ogg,  F.  A.,  Source-Book  of  Mediceval  History. 

N.  Y.,  1908. 
9. — Palmer,    W.,    Origines    Liturgicce.     2    vols. 
Lond.,  1845. 
10. — Roberts  and  Donaldson,  Ante-Nicene  Chris- 
tian Library.     Vol.  xxiv.     Edinb.,  1872. 
11. — Robinson,  J.  H.,  Readings  in  European  His- 
tory.    Vol.  i.     Boston,  1906. 
12.— Schaff,   P.,    The   Creeds  of   Christendom.     3 

vols.     N.  Y.,  1878. 
1?> — Swainson,  C.  A.,  The  Greek  Liturgies.     Lond. 

andN.  Y.,  1884. 
14.— Thatcher  and  McNeal,   A   Source  Book  for 

MedicBval  History.     N .  Y . ,  1907. 
15. — University  of  Penn.,   Translations  and  Re- 
prints of  Original  Sources  of  European  History. 
Phil.,  1894  to  present, 
j 6 — "Winer,  G.  B.,  Comparative  View  of  the  Doc- 
trines and  Confessions  of  Christendom.  Edinb. , 
1887 
II. — In  Foreign  Languages: 
1. — Councils  and  Synods: 

(1). — Binius,  S.,  Concilia  Generalia  et  Provin- 
cialia  GrcBca  et  Latina.     4  vols.     Best  ed., 
Cologne,     1606. 
(2). — Labbe,     P.,     Concilia.     18   vols.     Paris, 

1671.     Carried  by  others  to  1727. 
(3). — Hardouin,   J.,   Conciliorum  Collectio.     12 

vols.     Paris,  171 5. 
(4). — Mansi,  G.  D.,  Sacrorum  Conciliorum  Nova 
et     Amplissima   Collectio.     31  vols.    Flor., 
1759-98.     Most    complete    collection      to 
1509.     New  edition  now  out. 
2. — Bulls,  Acts,  Briefs,  Rescripts,  and  Regests: 

(1). — Bulks   Diver sorum  Pontificum   a   Joanne 


2o      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


XXII.  ad  Julium  III.  ex  Bibliotheca  Ludo- 
vici  Gomes.  Rome,  1550.  This  is  the 
oldest  collection,  but  it  contains  only  fifty 
documents. 

(2). — Cherubini  made  the  first  comprehensive 
collection  of  bulls  and  briefs  from  Leo  I. 
to  1585.  It  is  known  as  the  Magnum  Bul- 
larium  Romanum. 

(3). — Maynardus,  Bullarium  Magnum.  19 
vols.  Luxemb.,  1739-68.  Contains  bulls 
from  Leo  I.  to  Benedict  XIV. 

(4). — Coquelines  made  a  similar  collection  at 
Rome  in  14  vols.,  1733-48.  Barbarini 
added  6  more  vols.     Rome,  1835. 

(5). — Tomassetti  has  made  the  latest  collection 
of  bulls  from  Leo  I.  to  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury.    25  vols.     Turin,  1857-72. 

(6). — The  best  collections  of  early  papal  briefs 
were  made  by  Coustant,  Paris,  1721; 
Schoenemann,  Gotting.,  1796;  Thiel, 
Braunsberg,     1867-8. 

(7). — Jaffe\  P.,  Regesta  Pontificum  Romanorum 
(to  1 198).     Ber.,  1881-88.     2  vols. 

(8). — Potthast,  A.,  Regesta  Pontificum.  (1198  to 
1304).     Ber.,  1873.     2  vols. 

(9). — Kehr,  Regesta  Pontificum  Romanorum  (to 
1 1 98).  Berlin,  1906-7.  2  vols. 
(10). — The  Liber  Pontificalis  gives  the  history 
of  the  popes  down  to  the  end  of  the  ninth 
century.  Duchesne's  ed.  the  most  com- 
plete. Rome,  1886-92.  Mommsen's  ed. 
excellent. 
(11). — Mirbt,    C,    Quellen    zur    Geschichte    des 

Papsthums.     2d  ed.,  1903. 
-Creeds,  Liturgies,  and  Hymns: 

(1). — Walch,  C.  W.  F.,  Bibliotheca  Symbolum 
Vetus.     Lemgo.,  1770. 


General  Bibliography  21 


(2). — Niemeyer,  A.  H.,  Collectio  Confessionum  in 

Ecclesiis  Reformatis  Publicatarum.     Leipz. , 

1840 
(3). — Kimmel,  E.  J.,  Monumenta  Fidei  Ecclesics 

Orientalis.     Jena,  1843-50.     2  vols. 
(4). — Heurtley,    C.    A.,    Harmonia   Symbolica. 

Oxf.,  1858. 
(5). — Denzinger,   H.   J.   D.,   Enchiridion  Sym- 

bolorum   et   Definitionum.     Wurzb.,    1888. 

6th  ed. 
(6). — Caspari,  C.  P.,  Quellen  zur  Geschichte  des 

Tauf symbols  und  der  Glaubensregel.    Chris- 

tiania,  1866-75.     3  vols.     Revised  in  1879. 
(7). — Hahn,    A.,   Bibliothek   der   Symbole   und 

Glaubensregeln.     Berlin,   1877.     2d  ed. 
(8). — Durandus,  W.,  Rationale  Divinorum  Offi- 

ciorum.     (About  1290).     Many  eds.     Last 

at  Naples,  1866. 
(10). — Renaudot,  E.,  Liturgiarum  Orientalium 

Collectio.     Newed.,  Paris,  1847.     2  vols. 
(11). — Muratori,  L.  A.,  Liturgia  Romana  Vetus. 

Venice,  1748. 
(12). — Assemani,  J.  A.,  Codex  Liturgicus  Eccle- 

sicB  Universes.     Rome,  1749-66.     13  vols. 
(13). — Weale,  W.  J.  H.,  Bibliotheca  Liturgica. 

Lond.,  1886. 
(14). — Delisle,  L.,  Memoire  sur  d'anciens  Sacra- 

mentaires.     Paris,  1886. 
4. — Laws  and  Canons: 

(1). — Richter,    L.    A.,    Corpus  Juris  Canonici. 

Leipz.,  1833.     2  vols. 
(2). — Friedberg,    E.,    Corpus    Juris    Canonici. 

Leipz.,  1876-82.     Best  ed. 
(3). — Migne,  Patrologia  Latina.    Contains  many 

ancient  laws. 
(4). — Haenel,   Theodosian   Code.     Bonn,    1842. 

6  vols. 


22       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


(5). — Krueger,  Justinian  Code.     Ber.,   1877. 
(6). — Moser,  J.  J.,  Corpus  Juris  Evang.  Eccle- 
sicB.     Zur.,  1737.     2  vols. 
5. — Decrees  and  Acts  of  Civic  Authorities: 

(1). — Pertz,  et  al.,  Monumenta  Germanics  His- 

torica.     Ber.,  181 9  to  present. 
(2). — Muratori,    Scriptores  Rerum   Italicarum. 
Milan,    1723-57.     25   vols.     From   500    to 
1500. 
(3). — Thesaurus  Veterum  Inscriptionum.  Milan, 

1739-42.     4  vols. 
(4) . — Corpus  Juris  Civilis.    Good  ed.  by  Kriegel 
Brothers,    Leipz.,    1833-40.     Best  ed.   by 
Mommsen,  Ber.,  1895.     3  vols. 
B. — Private  Writings  of  Contemporaries: 
I. — In   English: 

1. — Roberts  and  Donaldson,  Ante-Nicene  Chris- 
tian Library.    25  vols.     Edinb.,  1864-72, 1897. 
2. — Coxe,  A.  C. ,  Ante-Nicene  Fathers.    10  vols.  Buf., 

1886-88. 
3. — Pusey,  et  al.,  A  Library  of  the  Fathers  of  the 
Holy  Catholic  Church.    48  vols.    Oxf.,  1839-85. 
4. — The   Publications  of   the  Parker   Society.     53 
vols.     Camb.,  1840-55.    For  English  Church. 
5. — Schaff,  et  al.,  Select  Library  of  the  Nicene  and 
Post-Nicene  Fathers  of  the  Christian  Church. 
14    vols.     Buf.,    1886-90.     First  series. 
6. — Schaff  and  Wace,  Select  Library  of  the  Nicene 
and    Post-Nicene    Fathers  of    the    Christian 
Church.     14  vols.    Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  1890-94. 
7. — Bohn,  Antiquarian  Library.    36  vols.     Lond., 
1847,  etc. 

Classical  Library.    107  vols.    Lond.,  1848,  etc. 
Ecclesiastical       Library.       15     vols.      Lond., 
1 85 1,  etc. 
8. — Foxe,   Acts  and  Monuments.     Townsend    ed. 
Lond.,  1843. 


General  Bibliography  23 


9. — Lightfoot,     The    Apostolic    Fathers.      Lond., 

1889. 
II. — In  Foreign  Languages: 

1. — Canisius,  H.,  Antique? Lectiones.    2d  ed.,  1725. 

7  vols. 
2. — Combefis,  F.,  Grceco-Lat.  Patrum  Biblioiheca 

Auctarium  Novum.     2  vols.     Paris,  1648. 

Biblioiheca    Grcecorum     Patrum     Auctarium 

Novissimum.     2    vols.     Paris,    1672. 

Biblioiheca  Patrum  Concoinatoria.      8    vols. 

New  ed.     Paris,  1859. 
3. — D'Achery,    J.     L.,    Veterum     aliquot    Scrip- 

torum  qui  in  Gallice  Bibliothecis  delituerant, 

maxime  Benedictinorum  Spicilegium.    1 3  vols. 

Paris,   1655-77.     New  ed.,   1723. 
4. — Du  Pin,  L.  E.,    Bibliotheque    Universelle    des 

Auteurs    Ecclesiastiques.      47     vols.      Paris, 

1 686-1 704.     Several  later  editions. 
5. — Martene,    E.,  Veterum  Scriptorum  et  Monu- 

mentorum  Collectio  Nova.     Rouen,    1700. 
6. — Montfaucon,  B.  de,  Collectio  Nova  Patrum  et 

Scriptorum     Grcecorum.      Paris,      1706.       2 

vols. 
7. — Muratori,    L.    A.,    Rerum    Italicarum    Scrip- 
tores,     Mil.,  1723-51.     25  vols.      New  ed.  now 

being  published,  ed.  by  Carducci. 
8. — Ceillier,    R.,    Histoire    Generale   des    Auteurs 

Sacres    et   Ecclesiastiques.     New   ed.,  Paris, 

1858-69.     16   vols. 
9. — Bouquet,    M.,   Scriptores   Rerum    Gallicarum 

et  Francilarum.     New   ed.,   Paris,    1869-77. 

To  date  23  vols. 
10. — Gallandi,    A.,   Biblioiheca    Veterum    Patrum 

Antiquorumque   Scriptorum  Ecclesiasticorum. 

14  vols.     Venice,   1765-81.     380  authors. 
11. — Routh,  M.  J.,  ReliquicB  Sacrce.     5  vols.    Oxf., 

2d  ed.,    1846-1848. 


24      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


12. — Pertz,  et  al.,  Monumenta  Germanics  His- 
torica.     Ber.,  1819  to  present. 

13. — Niebuhr,   et  al.,  Scriptores  Histories  Byzan- 
tines.    Bonn,  1828-55.     48  vols. 
/  14.     Migne,  J.  P.,  Patrologios  Cursus  Completus. 
Paris,   1844-66.     222  vols,  of  Latin  Fathers 
and  166  vols,  of  Greek  Fathers. 

15. — Chronicles  and  Memorials  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland  from  the  Roman  Invasion  to 
Henry  VIII.  Lond.,  1858-90.  210  vols. 
(Rolls  series). 

16. — Academy  of  Vienna,  Corpus  Scriptorum 
Ecclesios  Latincs.     17  vols.    Vienna,  1867-95. 

17. — Jaffe,  P.,  Bibliotheca  Rerum  Germanicarum. 
1864-73.     6  vols. 

18. — Graffin,  P.,  Patrologia  Syriaca.  Paris,  1895. 
2  vols. 

(19). — Die  Griechischen  christlichen  Schriftsteller 
der  ersten  drei  Jahrhunderte. 

(20) . — Bibliotheque de  Theologie  Historique.    Paris. 
1906  ff.    (To  be  completed  in  60  vols.) 
C. — Inscriptions : 
I. — In    English: 

1. — Northcote,  J.  S.,  Epitaphs  of  the  Catacombs. 
Lond.,  1898. 

2. — Bingham,  J.,  Antiquities  of  the  Christian 
Church.    Oxf.,  1855.    10  vols.   Very  valuable. 

3. — Guericke,  H.  E.  F.,  Manual  of  the  Antiqui- 
ties of  the  Church.     Lond.,   1851. 

4. — Bennett,  C.  W.,  Christian  Archcsology.  N.  Y., 
1888. 

5. — Rushforth,  G.  McN.,  Latin  Historical  Inscrip- 
tions.    Oxf.,  1893. 
II. — In  Latin: 

1 . — See  Corpus  Inscriptionum  Latinarum.  Best  ed. 
by  Mommsen  under  Berlin  Academy.  1862 
to  date  1 1  vols. 


General  Bibliography  25 


2. — Boeckh,    P.    A.,    Corpus   Inscriptionum  Grce- 

carum.     Ber.,  1824. 
3. — Le  Blant,  E.,  Inscriptions  chret.  de  la  Gaule. 

Paris,  1856-65.     2  vols. 
4. — Hiibner,  E.,  Inscriptiones Hispan.  Christ.  Ber., 

1871. 

Inscrip.  Brit.  Christ.     Ber.,  1876. 
5. — De  Rossi,  J.  B.,  Inscriptiones  Christians  Urbis 

Roma  Septimo  Sceculo  Antiquiores.      Rome, 

1861. 
6. — Fabretti,  A.,  Corpus  Inscriptionum  Italicarum. 

Turin,  1867-77.     2  vols.     Three  supplements. 

Flor.,  1800. 
7. — L'Epigraphie    Chrestienne    en    Gaule  et  dans 

VAfrique.     Paris,  1890. 

Most  Important  General  Church  Historians: 

A. — Before  the  Reformation: 
I. — Greek: 

1. — Hegesippus,  a  Christian  Jew  in  Asia  Minor 
(2d  cent.),  wrote  a  Church  history  in  five 
books.  Based  on  traditions.  Only  fragments 
preserved.  See  Ante-Nic.  Lib.,  viii. ,  762-5. 
See  Eusebius. 

2. — Eusebius  (d.  340),  "Father  of  Church  History," 
wrote  a  history  of  Church  to  324.  Valuable 
storehouse.  Various  Eng.  translations.  That 
by  McGiffert,  N.  Y.,  1890,  in  Nic.  and  Post- 
Nic.  Fathers,  i.,  is  the  best. 

3. — Socrates  (d.  408) ,  a  lawyer,  continued  Euse- 
bius to  439.  Bohn.  Nic.  and  Post-Nic. 
Fathers,  ii. 

4. — Sozomen  (d.  400),  a  lawyer,  continued  Euse- 
bius to  423.     Ibid.     Bohn. 

5. — Theodoret  (d.  457),  a  bishop,  aimed  to  com- 
plete  Socrates  and   Sozomen.    Ibid.  Bohn. 


26      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


6. — Evagrius    (d.  537),  a  lawyer,  continued  Theo- 
doret.     Bohn.     Bagster,    Eccles.   Historians. 
For  other  Greek  historians,  lost  or  not  in  English, 
see  Alzog,  i.,  §  17;  SchafE  i.,  29. 
II. — Latin — to  the  Reformation: 

1. — Rufinus  (b.  345),  a  priest,  translated  Euse- 
bius  and  added  an  inaccurate  history  of  the 
Arians  (318-395).  Preface  only  in  Eng.  Nic. 
and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  iii.,  565. 

2. — Severus  (b.  363),  a  Gallic  priest,  wrote  the 
history  of  the  world  to  400.  Good  for  Gaul. 
76.,  xi.,  71-122. 

3. — Orosius  (5th  cent.),  a  Spanish  priest,  wrote 
a  world  history  to  416.  Used  as  a  text-book 
in  Middle  Ages.     Bohn. 

4. — Cassiodorus  (d.  562),  a  statesman  and  abbot, 
compiled  a  Church  history  from  Socrates, 
Sozomen,  and  Theodoret.  This  is  the  famous 
"Tripartite  History."  It  served  as  a  text- 
book throughout  the  Middle  Ages.  Not  in 
Eng.  See  Migne,  Patrologia,  lxix.,  and  Hodg- 
kin,  The  Letters  of  Cassiodorus. 

5. — Gregory  of  Tours  (d.  594),  a  bishop,  wrote 
a  valuable  history  of  the  Frankish  Church. 
Not  in  Eng. 

6.— Venerable  Bede  (d.  735),  "Father  of  English 
Church  History,"  wrote  a  history  of  the 
English  Church  to  731.     Many  Eng.  eds. 

7. — Paul  Warnefried  (d.  799),  a  Lombard  monk 
wrote  a  History  of  the  Langobords.  Tr.  by 
Foulke.U.  of  Pa.  Transl  and  Rep.  Phil.  1907. 

8. — Haymo  (d.  853),  bishop  of  Halderstadt, 
abridged  Rufinus  and  added  notes  of  his 
own.     Not  in  Eng. 

9. — Anastasius  (d.  886),  abbot  and  papal  libra- 
rian at  Rome,  compiled  a  Church  history 
from  the  Greek  writers.     Not  in  Eng. 


General  Bibliography  27 


10. — Flodoard  (d.  966),  a  bishop,  wrote  a  history 
of  the  Church  of  Rheims  to  948.  Not 
in  Eng. 

11. — Luitprand  (d.  972),  bishop  of  Cremona, 
wrote  a  chronicle  and  a  report  of  his  embassy 
to  Constantinople.  See  Pertz,  Mon.  Ger., 
iii.,  264;  Henderson,  Hist.  Docs,  of  the  M.  A., 
441. 

12. — Adam  of  Bremen  (d.  1076),  a  canon,  wrote 
the  only  reliable  history  of  the  Scandinavian 
Church  from  788  to  1076.     Not  in  Eng. 

13. — Orderic  Vital  (d.  1142),  abbot  in  Normandy, 
wrote  a  Church  history  to  1142.  Best  work 
of  the  Middle  Ages.  In  Eng.,  Bohn.  Vols. 
27,  28,  30,  36. 

14. — Ptolemy  of  Lucca  (d.  13 12),  a  Dominican, 
and  papal  librarian,  wrote  a  Church  history 
to  13 1 2.     Not  in  Eng. 

15. — St.  Antoninus  (d.  1459),  archbishop  of 
Florence,  wrote  the  largest  mediaeval  work 
from  the  creation  to  1457.     Not  in  Eng. 

16. — Laurentius  Valla  (d.  1457),  an  Italian  critic 
and  scholar,  wrote  a  history  of  the  Church. 
Denounced  the  "Donation  of  Constantine" 
as  a  forgery.  Work  full  of  doubt.  Not  in 
Eng. 

17. — Nicholas  of  Cusa  (d.  1464),  a  cardinal, 
was  a  radical  critic  in  his  early  days  but 
temperate  in  later  life.  His  works  not  in 
Eng. 

18. — John  of  Tritenheim  (d.  1516)  was  among  the 
first  historians  to  write  from  the  sources. 
Not  in  Eng. 

19. — Albert  Cranz  (d.  1517),  a  canon  of  Hamburg, 
wrote  "The  Metropolis,"  a  critical  history  of 
the  Church  in  northern  Germany  from  780 
to  1504.     Not  in  Eng. 


28      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


B. — Roman  Catholic  historians  after  the  Reformation: 
I. — Italian: 

i. — Baronius  (d.  1607),  a  cardinal,  wrote  Annates 
Ecclesiastici  in  12  fol.  vols.  The  work  of  30 
years.  Invaluable.  Not  in  Eng.  Written 
to  refute  the  Protestant  Magdeburg  Centuries. 
Continued  from  1198  to  1566  by  Raynaldus, 
to  1 57 1  by  Laderchi,  to  1584  by  Theiner. 
Pagi  made  valuable  corrections.  Best  de- 
fence of  the  mediaeval  papacy. 

2. — Caspar  Saccarelli  wrote  Historia  Eccle- 
siastica  to  1185.  Pub.  in  Rome,  1771-96,  in 
25  quarto  vols. 

3. — Muratori  (d.  1750)  made  a  valuable  collection 
of  Italian  historians  and  original  documents 
from  500  to  1500.     Not  in  Eng. 

4. — Mansi  (d.  1769)  edited  a  valuable  and  very 
complete  edition  of  the  councils.      Not  in  Eng. 

5. — Orsi  (1761),  a  Dominican  cardinal,  wrote  a 
Church  history  for  the  first  six  centuries. 
Continued  by  others  to  the  Council  of  Trent. 
Not  in  Eng. 

For  other  Italian  historians  see  Alzog,  i.,  49. 
II.— French: 

1. — Natalis  Alexander  (d.  1724)  wrote  a  clear, 
deep  Church  history  to  1600.  Its  Gallican 
spirit  put  it  in  the  Index  till  corrected. 

2. — Abbe"  Fleury  (d.  1723)  wrote  a  Church  history 
to  1 41 4  in  20  vols,  from  the  sources.  Con- 
tinued to  1595  by  Fabre.  First  3  vols.  pub. 
in  Eng.  at  Oxf.,  in  1842. 

3. — Bossuet  (d.  1704),  the  bishop  of  Meaux,  wrote 
a  "Discourse  on  Universal  History.  In  Eng. 
Continued  by  Cramer,  a  German  Protestant. 

4. — Tillemont  (d.  1698),  a  nobleman  and  priest, 
wrote  fine  biographies  to  5 1 6  from  the  sources. 
An  excellent  piece  of  work  in  16  vols. 


General  Bibliography  29 


5- — Du  Pin  (d.  1719)  furnished  a  biographical  and 
bibliographical  Church  history  to  the  17  th 
century. 

6. — Ceillier  (d.  1763)  wrote  a  similar  work  but 
more  complete  and  valuable. 

7. — Darras  (d.   1872).     A  General  History  of  the 
Catholic  Church.      Transl.  by  Spaulding.      4 
vols.     Not  reliable. 
III. — German: 

1. — Count  Leopold  von  Stolberg  (d.  181 9),  an 
ex-Protestant,  wrote  a  Church  history  to 
430  in  1 5  vols.  Kerz  continued  it  in  30  more 
vols,  to  1 192  and  Brischar  in  9  more  vols, 
to  1245. 

2. — Theodore  Katerkamp  (d.  1834),  a  professor 
at  Munster,  and  a  friend  of  Stolberg,  wrote 
a  history  to  11 53. 

3. — Locherer  (d.  1837),  a  professor  at  Giessen,  pro- 
duced a  very  liberal  work  up  to  1073. 

4- — Dollinger  (d.  1890),  a  professor  in  Munich,  was 
the  most  learned  historian  of  the  Catholic 
Church  in  the  19th  cent.  Was  excommuni- 
cated for  refusing  to  accept  the  Vatican 
decrees  (187 1).  Most  of  his  many  works 
have  been  translated  into  Eng. 

5- — Hefele  (d.  1893),  a  professor  at  Tubingen  and 
a  bishop,  wrote  History  of  the  Councils  to 
1447.  An  excellent  piece  of  work.  Com- 
pleted by  Hergenrother.     In  Eng. 

6. — Gfrorer  (d.  1861)  began  his  learned  Church 
history  as  a  rationalist  (1841)  and  continued 
it  from  1056  on  as  a  Catholic. 

7- — Hergenrother  (d.  1890),  cardinal  and  keeper 
of  the  papal  archives  at  Rome,  wrote  a  general 
history  of  the  Church  which  is  very  partisan. 
IV. — English  and  American: 

1. — Newman  (d.  1890),  an  English  cardinal,  wrote 


3©      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  Arians  of    the  Fourth    Century   (1883), 
Church  of  the  Fathers,  and  many  other  his- 
torical works. 
2. — Allies,  The  Formation  of  Christendom.     Lond., 

1882-91.     7  vols. 
3. — Spalding  (1872),  an  American  prelate,  wrote 
The   History   of   the  Protestant  Reformation, 
2    vols.,   i860,   and    edited  Darras's  General 
History  of  the   Catholic  Church.     (1868.) 
4. — Gibbons  (b.  1834),  cardinal  in  the  U.  S.,  wrote 
Faith  of  Our  Fathers  and  other  historical  works. 
C. — Protestant  Church  Historians: 
I. — German: 

1.— Matthias  Flacius  Illyricus  (d.  1575).  witn 
ten  educated  Protestant  scholars,  produced 
the  Centuries  Magdeburgenses,  covering  13 
centuries  in  13  vols.,  to  justify  the  Refor- 
mation.    Controversial. 

2. — Hottinger  (d.  1664)  wrote  a  partisan  history 
to  16th  cent,  in  9  vols.     Not  original. 

3. — Spanheim  (d.  1649)  worked  out  a  history 
from  the  sources  to  16th  cent.  Aimed  at 
Baronius.  Eng.  transl. 

4. — Arnold,  (d.  17 14)  wrote  an  Impartial  His- 
tory of  the  Church  and  of  Heretics  to  1688. 
"Learned,  but  fanatical." 

5. — Mosheim  (d.  1755)  wrote  Institutes  of  Ec- 
clesiastical History.  Marks  an  epoch  in  the 
writing  of  Church  history.  Several  Eng. 
transls. 

6. — Schrockh  (d.  1808)  wrote  large  work  in  45 
vols,  on  epoch  plan,  to  end  of  18th  cent. 
Rich  in  historical  material. 

7. — Henke  (d.  1809)  wrote  a  general  history  in  a 
very  rationalistic  style. 

8. — Neander  (d.  1850),  professor  in  Berlin,  the 
"  Father  of  Modern  Church  History,"    wrote 


General  Bibliography  31 

A  General  History  of  the  Christian  Religion 
and  Church  to  1430.  Based  on  the  sources. 
Several  Eng.  transls.  Torrey's  the  best. 
9. — Gieseler  (d.  1854),  professor  in  Gottingen, 
wrote  a  history  from  the  sources  to  1648. 
Various  Eng.  transls.     Excellent. 

10. — Baur  (d.  i860),  professor  in  Tubingen,  pro- 
duced a  History  of  the  Christian  Church  in  5 
vols.     In  Eng. 

11.— Hagenbach    (d.    1874),    professor   in   Basle, 
wrote  a  general  history  of  the  Church  in  7 
vols.     In  Eng. 
II. — French: 

1. — Chastel  (d.  1886),  professor  at  Geneva,  wrote 
a  complete  history  of  the  Church  in  5  vols. 

2. — D'Aubigne  (d.  1872),  professor  at  Geneva, 
wrote  a  general  history  of  the  Reformation 
in  13  vols.     In  Eng. 

3.— Renan,  E.  (d.  1892),  was  educated  for  the 
Catholic  priesthood,  but  he  early  gave  up 
that  calling  and  devoted  himself  to  history 
and  literature.  He  produced  many  works 
of  great  value  on  early  Church  history. 
III.— English: 

1. — Gibbon  (d.  1794)  devoted  twenty  years  to  his 
history  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman 
Empire.  To  1453.  Still  very  valuable.  Best- 
ed, by  Bury     Lond.,  1896. 

2.— Milner  (d.  1797)  wrote  a  History  of  the  Church 
of  Christ  in  popular  form. 

3.— Dean  Waddington  (d.  1869)  penned  six  "high 
and  dry"  vols,  on  the  Church. 

4.— Robertson  (d.  1882),  professor  in  King's  Col- 
lege, London,  wrote  a  History  of  the  Christian 
Church  to  1517.  Fairly  well  done  from  the 
sources. 

5.— Milman  (d.  1868),  among  other  works,  wrote 


32      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


1/ 


the  History  of  Latin  Christianity  to  1455  in 
8  vols.     Excellent. 

6. — Dean  Stanley  (d.  1881)  has  given  us  histories 
of  the  Eastern  Church  and  Jewish  Church  in 
a  pure,  plain  style. 

7. — Creighton    (d.    1901),   has   written   the   best 
History  of  the  Papacy  from  the  Great  Schism 
to  the  Sack  of  Rome.     6  vols.     Invaluable. 
IV. — American : 

1. — Smith  (d.  1877),  professor  in  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  worked  out  the  history  of 
Christianity  in  16  chronological  tables,  (i860). 

2. — Shedd,  (d.  1894),  professor  in  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  wrote  a  History  of  Christian 
Doctrine  in  2  vols.     1863. 

3. — Schaff  (d.  1893),  professor  in  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  a  disciple  of  Neander,  wrote, 
in  addition  to  other  works  of  value,  a  History 
of  the  Christian  Church.  To  the  Reformation. 
7  vols.     Excellent.     Vol.  5,  by  D.  S.  Schaff. 

4. — Sheldon  (b.  1845)  has  written  an  excellent 
history  of  doctrine  and  also  of  the  Church. 
5  vols.     1896. 

5. — Allen  (d.  1908)  wrote  Christian  History  in 
Three  Great  Decades  in  3  vols.     1883. 

6. — Fisher  (b.  1827),  professor  in  Yale,  has  pro- 
duced several  valuable  books  on  Church 
history. 

7. — White  (d.  1885)  wrote  Eighteen  Christian 
Centuries. 

8. — Lea  (b.  1825)  has  written  invaluable  mono- 
graphs on  the  Inquisition,  Indulgences,  Celi- 
bacy, etc.,  which  have  given  him  a  world- 
wide reputation. 
9. — Other  Americans  who  are  doing  good  work  in 
Church  history  are:  Jackson,  Hurst,  Baird, 
Thompson,  Mombert,  Gillett,  Storrs,  Taylor, 


General  Bibliography 


33 


Clark,  Emerton,  Bigelow,  West,  Fulton, 
Jacobs,  Newman,  Zenos,  Dexter,  McGiffert, 
Dryer,  Faulkner,  etc. 

Dictionaries  and  Encyclopedias 


—English : 
I. — Protestant: 

i — Abbott  and  Conant,  Dictionary  of  Religious 
Knowledge.     N.  Y.,  1875. 

2. — Benham,  Dictionary  of  Religion.  Lond.  and 
N.  Y.,  1887. 

3. — Blunt,  A  Dictionary  of  Doctrinal  and  His- 
torical Theology.  Lond.  and  Phil.,  2d  ed., 
1891. 

4. — Blunt,  A  Dictionary  of  Sects,  Heresies,  Ec- 
clesiastical Parties,  and  Schools  of  Religious 
Thought.     Lond.  and  Phil.,  2d  ed.,  1886. 

5. — Buck,  A  Theological  Dictionary .   Lond.,  1847. 

6. — Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyclopedia  Biblica. 
4  vols.     N.  Y.,  1905. 

7. — Eadie,  The  Ecclesiastical  Cyclopedia.    Lond. , 

1847. 
8. — Encyclopedia  of  Religious  Knowledge.     Phil., 

1870. 
9. — Farrar,  An  Ecclesiastical  Dictionary.     Lond., 

10. — Gardner,  The  Christian  Cyclopedia.  Lond., 
1854. 

11. — Hastings,  A  Dictionary  of  the  Bible.  N.  Y. 
and  Edinburgh. 

12. — Herzog,  A  Protestant,  Theological,  and  Ec- 
clesiastical Encyclopcedia.  2  vols.  Phil., 
1858-60. 

13. — Hook,  A   Church  Dictionary.     N.   Y.,   1875. 

14. — Hook,  Ecclesiastical  Biography.  4  vols. 
Lond.,  1845. 


34      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


15. — Jackson,  Concise  Dictionary  of  Religious 
Knowledge  and  Gazetteer.     N.  Y.,   1893. 

16. — McClintock  and  Strong,  Cyclopedia  of  Bibli- 
cal, Theological,  and  Ecclesiastical  Literature. 
10  vols.  N.  Y.,  1867-81.     2  sup.  vols.  1884-86. 

17. — Marsden,  A  Dictionary  of  Christian  Churches 
and  Sects.     2  vols.    Lond.,  1891. 

18. — Sanford,  A  Concise  Encyclopaedia  of  Religious 
Knowledge.     N.  Y.,  1891. 

19. — Schaff-Herzog,    Encyclopedia    of    Religious 
Knowledge.     3  vols.    N.  Y.,  1891. 
The   New     Schaff-Herzog     Encyclopaedia     of 
Religious  Knowledge.    Revised  by  S.  M.  Jack- 
son.    N.  Y.  and  Lond.,  1908  ff.      In  12  vols. 

20. — Shipley,  A  Glossary  of  Ecclesiastical  Forms. 
Lond.,  1871. 

21. — Smith  and  Cheetham,  A  Dictionary  of 
Christian  Antiquities.  2  vols.  Bost.,  1875-80. 

22. — Smith  and  Wace,  A  Dictionary  of  Christian 
Biography,  Literature,  Sects,  and  Doctrines. 
4  vols.    Bost.,  1877-87. 

23. — Stanton,  An  Ecclesiastical  Dictionary.  N.  Y., 
1861. 

24. — Wolcott,  Sacred  Archeology.      Lond.,  1868. 
II.— Catholic: 

1. — Addis  and  Arnold,  A  Catholic  Dictionary. 
N.  Y.,  1884. 

2. — Gillow,  Dictionary  of  English  Catholic  Bio- 
graphy and  Bibliography.  (1 534-1 884.)  6 
vols.      Lond.,   1887-94. 

3. — Gibbings,  Index  Expur gator  is.      Lond.,  1837. 

4. — Butler,  Lives  of  the  Fathers,  Martyrs  and 
Other  Saints.     12  vols.     Lond.,  1866. 

5. — Berington,  The  Faith  of  Catholics.  3  vols. 
Lond.,  1846. 

6. — The  Catholic  Encyclopedia.  N.  Y.,  1907  ff. 
(To  be  completed  in  15  vols.) 


General  Bibliography  35 


7. — Thein,  Ecclesiastical  Dictionary,  1905. 
III. — Jewish  and  Mohammedan: 

1. — The  Jewish  Encyclopedia.     12   vols.     N.  Y., 

1902-5. 
2. — Encyclopedia  Islam.     3  vols.     1908. 
B. — Foreign: 

I. — Protestant: 

1. — Hauck,  Herzog's  Real-Encyklopddie  fur  protes- 

tantische  Theologie  und  Kirche.     1896  ff. 
2. — Lichtenberger,  Encyclopedie   des  Sciences  Re- 
ligieuses.     Paris,  1872-82.    13  vols. 
II.— Catholic: 

1 .  — Aschbach ,    Allgemeines  Kirchen-Lexicon. 

Frankf.,  1846-50.     4  vols. 
2. — Wetzer  und  Welte,  Kirchen  Lexicon.     Freib., 

1847-56.     12  vols. 
3. —  Hergenrother    und    Kauler.       Kirchenlexikon 
oder  Encyklopddie  der  Katholischen  Theologie 
und  ihrer  Hilfswissenschaften.     Freib.,   1880- 

1895.      IO  v°ls- 
C. — Consult  standard  secular  encyclopaedias  like  Britan- 
nica,  Johnson,  International,  etc. 

Atlases  and  Chronologies 

I. — English: 

1. — Koeppen,  A.  L.,   The  World  in  the  Middle 

Ages.      N.   Y.,    1854. 
2. — Spriiner,  Historico-Geographical  Hand  Atlas. 

Lond.,  1861. 
3. — Wiltsch,  J.  E.  F.,  Handbook  of  the  Geography 

and  Statistics  of  the  Church.     2  vols.    Lond., 

1859-69. 
4. — McClure,  C.  E.,  Ecclesiastical  Atlas.     Lond., 

1888. 
5. — Freeman,    E.    A.,    Historical    Geography    of 

Europe.      Lond.,     1881.      2    vols.     New    ed. 

1904. 


36       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


6. — Labberton,  R.  H.,  New  Historical  Atlas  and 

General  History.     N.  Y.,  1890. 
7. — Riddle,     J.     E.,     Ecclesiastical     Chronology. 

Lond.,   1840. 
8. — Tamer,  G.  E.,  Concise  Tabular  View  of  the 
Outlines  of  Christian  History.     Lond.,   1890. 
9. — Smith,    H.    B.,    History    of    the    Church    in 

Chronological   Tables.     N.    Y.,    1875. 
10. — Woodward     and     Cates,     Encyclopcedia     of 

Chronology.     N.  Y.,   1872. 
11. — Dow,    E.    W.,    Atlas   of   European   History. 
N.  Y.,  1907. 
II. — Foreign: 

1. — Putzger,     F.    W.,    Historischer    Schul- Atlas. 

Leipz.,  1903.     Anglicised  now.     Excellent. 
2. — Droysen,  H.,  Allgemeine  historische  Handatlas. 

Leipz.,  1886. 
3. — Weidenbach,  Calendarium  Hist.  Chron.  Medii 

et  Novi  JEvi.     Reg.,  1855. 
4. — Grotefend,  G.  A.,  Handbuch  des  Hist.  Chr.  des 
Mittel- Alters.     Hanov.,  1872. 

Text-books  on  Church  History 

I. — Protestant: 

1. — Allen,  Outlines  of  Christian  History.     Bost., 

1885.     3  vols. 
2. — Blackburn,  History  of  the  Christian  Church. 

Cin.,1879.  (Presb.). 
3. — Butler,    An    Ecclesiastical    History.     Phil., 

1868-72.     2  vols. 
4. — Fisher,  History  of  the  Christian  Church.  N.  Y., 

1887. 
5. — Foulkes,  A  Manual  of  Ecclesiastical  History. 

Oxf.,  1851. 
6. — Gieseler,    A    Text-Book   of   Church   History. 

N.  Y.,  1868-79.     5  vols. 


General  Bibliography  37 

7. — Green.  Handbook  of  Church  History.    N.  Y., 

1904. 
8. — Guericke,  A  Manual  of  Church  History  (to 

1073).     And.,  1872.     2  vols. 
9. — Hardwick,  A  History  of  the  Christian  Church. 

Lond.,  1861-65.     2  vols- 
10. — Hase,   A   History  of  the   Christian   Church. 

N.  Y.,  1870. 
11. — Hurst,  A   History  of  the  Christian  Church. 

N.  Y.,  1897.     2  vols. 
12.— Jennings,    A    Manual    of    Church    History. 

N.  Y.,  1887-8.     2  vols. 
13- — Knight,   A    Concise  History  of  the  Church. 

Lond.,  1888. 
14- — Kurtz,    Church   History.    N.    Y.,    1888.      3 

vols. 
15. — Moeller,    History   of    the    Christian    Church. 

Lond.,  1902.     3  vols. 
16. — Moncrief,  A  Short  History  of  the  Christian 

Church.     Chicago  and  N.  Y.,  1902. 
17. — Mosheim,  Institutes  of  Ecclesiastical  History. 

Last  ed.,    Bost.,  1902.  3  vols. 
18. — Newman,    A    Manual    of    Church    History. 

Phil.,  1902-3.     2  vols. 
19. — SchafT,    History   of    the    Christian    Church. 
N.  Y.,  1884-92.     7  vols. 
Vol.  v.,  by  D.  S.  Schaff,  N.  Y.,  1908. 
20. — Smith,  The  Student's  Manual  of  Ecclesiastical 

History.     N.  Y.,  1879. 
2 1 . — Schubert,  Outlines  of  Church  History.     Lond. , 

1907. 
22. — Sohm,  Outlines  of   Church   History.     Lond., 

1895. 
2 3- — Waddington,  A  History  of  the  Church.    Lond. , 

l835-     3  vols. 
24- — Zenos,     Compendium    of     Church     History. 
Phil.,  1900. 


38       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


II.— Catholic: 

i. — Alzog,  A  Manual  of  Universal  Church  History. 

Lond.,  1888-90.     3  vols. 
2. — Birkheuser,  History    of    the   Catholic    Church 
from  its  First  Establishment  to  our  own  Times. 
7th  ed.,  1905. 
3. — Brueck,  History  of  the  Catholic  Church.    N.Y., 

1886. 
4. — Dollinger,  Manual  of  Church  History.     Lond., 

1840-42.     4  vols. 
5. — Gilmartin,  Manual  of  Church  History.     Lond., 
1890-2.     2  vols. 
It  is  a  matter  of  deep  regret  that  such  excellent  books 
by  Catholic  writers  like  Hergenrother,  Kraus,  Mohler,  Funk, 
etc.,  have  not  yet  been  translated  into  English. 

Sources 

1. — Adams,   C.   K.,   A   Manual  of   Historical  Literature. 

N.  Y.,  1888. 
2. — Cave,  A.,  Introduction  to  Theology.     Edinb.,  1886. 
3. — Crooks,  G.  R.,  and  Hurst,  J.  F.,  Literature  of  Theology. 

N.  Y.,  1896.     Pt.  iii. 
4. — Darling,  J.,  Cyclopcedia  Bibliographica.    3  vols.    Lond., 

1854-9. 
5. — Donaldson,  J.,  A  Critical  History  of  Christian  Litera- 
ture.    3  vols.     Lond.,  1864-6. 
6. — Dowling,  J.  G.,  An  Introduction  to  the  Critical  Study 

of  Ecclesiastical  History.     London,  1832. 
7. — Fisher,  J.  A.,  A  Select  Bibliography  of  Ecclesiastical 

History.     Bost.,  1885. 
8. — Fortescue,  G.  K.,  Subject  Index  of  the  Modem  Works 

Added  to  the  Library  of  the  British  Museum  in  the 

Years  i88i-iqoo.     3  vols.     190 2-1 904. 
9. — Hurst,   J.   F.,   Literature  of   Theology.     N.   Y.,    1896. 

Pt.  iii.,  p.  186. 
10. — Kriiger,  G.,  History  of   Early  Christian  Literature  in 

the  First  Three  Centuries.     N.  Y.,  1897. 
11. — Malcom,  H.,  Theological  Index.     Phil.,   1870. 
12. — Poole,  W.  F.,  Index  to  Periodical  Literature  (1802  to 

date). 


General  Bibliography  39 


13. — Schaff,  P.,  Theological  Propedeutics.     N.  Y.,  1893. 
14.     Sonnenschein,  W.  S.,  The  Best  Books.     Lond.,  1896. 
15. — Tibbals,  C.  F.,  Thesaurus  of  the  Best  Theological,  His- 
torical, and  Biographical  Literature.     N.  Y.,  1891. 


CHAPTER  III 

PREPARATION     OF     THE       CIVILISED     WORLD     FOR      THE 
CHRISTIAN  CHURCH 

Outline:  I. — The  ancient  world.  II. — Condition  of  the  civilised 
world  at  the  time  Jesus  came.  III. — How  the  condition  of  the 
world  prepared  the  way  for  Christianity.     IV. — Sources. 

THE  ancient  world  included  the  many  independent 
tribes  surrounding  the  Mediterranean  Sea  and 
spreading  into  the  interior.  This  independence 
was  institutional.  Each  tribe  had  its  own  government, 
laws,  and  customs ;  its  own  religion  and  gods ;  its  own 
ideals  of  education;  its  own  commercial  and  industrial 
methods.  But  all  these  diversities  of  life  and  thought 
were  broken  down  by  the  ascendancy  of  Rome.  The 
independent  laws,  gods,  and  institutions  fell  before 
the  onward  march  of  those  of  the  Mistress  of  the  World. 
When  Jesus  was  born,  the  Roman  Empire  extended 
from  the  Euphrates  to  the  Atlantic,  and  from  the 
African  desert  to  the  Danube,  Rhine,  and  Weser.  It 
formed  a  wide  fringe  around  the  Mediterranean  Sea, 
included  the  best  parts  of  three  continents,  and  had  a 
population  of  100,000,000. »  The  Empire  was  called 
"the  world."  Roman  law  was  predominant  through- 
out the  provinces  as  well  as  at  Rome,  but  local  usages 
were   tolerated.     Citizenship    had    become    so   widely 

>  Mommsen,  v.,chs.  11-12;  Merivale,  i.,  ch.  1.;  iv.,ch.  39;  Liddell, 
ii.,  ch.  71;   Bury's  Gibbon,  i.,  chs.  1-3;  Finlay,  i.,  ch.  1. 

40 


Preparation  for  Christian  Church        41 


extended  that  the  different  peoples  began  to  feel  them- 
selves a  single  race,  bound  together  by  one  Emperor, 
one  government,  and  one  code  of  laws. 

The  era  of  the  boyhood  of  Jesus  was  one  of  compara- 
tive peace,  since  there  was  no  important  war  after  the 
naval  battle  of  Actium  (31  b.c.).1  Hence  the  indus- 
tries of  the  Empire  prospered  greatly.  Across  the 
Mediterranean  as  the  great  highway,  up  and  down  the 
rivers,  and  along  the  incomparable  Roman  roads,  an 
enormous  trade  was  carried  on  between  the  colonies 
and  the  capital,  Rome.2  Factories  thrived  in  every 
direction  and  commerce  flourished.  Showers  of  wealth 
fairly  fell  upon  the  Eternal  City. 

The  trade  of  the  Empire  was  carried  on  in  Latin, 
the  official  language  of  the  Empire  for  law  and  war. 
Greek  was  also  a  universal  tongue,  but  used  more 
especially  for  art.  science,  philosophy,  education,  and 
religi  on . 3  Cicero  complained : ' '  Greek  is  read  in  almost 
all  nations.  Latin  is  confined  by  its  own  natural 
boundaries."  Hebrew  and  other  tongues  were  sec- 
tional. The  literature  of  the  opening  century  of  the 
Christian  era,  however,  was  largely  in  Latin,4  which 
had  been  fertilised  by  Greek  culture. 

Education  had  made  far  greater  progress  in  this 
old  world  than  is  generally  thought.   Judea,s  Greece,6 

1  1  Tim.  ii.,  2.  Epictetus  wrote:  "Caesar  has  promised  us  a  pro- 
found peace;  there  are  neither  wars,  nor  battles,  nor  great  robberies, 
nor  piracy." — Dis.,  iii.,  13. 

3  Lewin,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  Lond.,  1878.  Bergier, 
Histoire  des  Grands  Chemins  de  VEmpire  Rotnain. 

i  Merivale,  iv.,  ch.  41. 

4  The  chief  writers  were:  Ovid,  d.  17;  Livy,  d.  17;  Lucan,  d.  65; 
Seneca,  d.  65;  Pliny,  d.  115;  Tacitus,  d.  1 19;  Juvenal,  d.  130. 

5  Schurer,  ii.,  §  22;  Graetz,  i.,  ch.  20. 

*  Plato,  Protagoras,  tr.  by  Jowett;  Aristotle,  Politics,  bk.  8, 
tr.  by  Jowett;    Mahaffy,  Old  Greek  Ed.;    St.  John,  The  Hellenes, 


42       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  Rome 1  had  excellent  systems  of  education,  though 
differing  much  in  purpose  and  in  subjects  studied. 
Pronounced  schools  of  philosophy  grew  up.  Art, 
comparatively  little  developed  among  the  Jews,  cul- 
minated with  the  Greeks,  and  from  them  was  trans- 
planted to  Rome.  Travel,  always  liberalising  and 
educational,  was  widespread  among  scholars,  trades- 
men, soldiers,  and  public  officials.  All  these  factors 
had  produced  a  superior  intelligence  and  general 
culture  throughout  the  Empire. 

The  religious  condition  of  the  Empire  was  very  sig- 
nificant. The  Roman  religion,  a  mixture  of  Grecian  and 
Etrurian  religions2 — of  licentiousness  and  puritanism 
— was  alone  legal  over  the  whole  Empire.3  The  Em- 
peror, as  Pontifex  Maximus,  was  head  of  the  religion. 
Worship,  however,  had  become  mere  form — even 
priests  ridiculed  the  gods.  Cicero  declared:  "One 
soothsayer  could  not  look  another  in  the  face  without 
laughing,"  and  "even  old  women  would  no  longer 
believe  either  in  the  fables  of  Tartarus  or  the  joys  of 
Elysium."  This  loss  of  faith  engendered  skepticism 
and  superstition,  and  gave  magicians  and  necro- 
mancers a  wide  patronage.  The  best  men  in  Rome 
were  demanding  reformation,  and  were  longing  for  and 
predicting  a  new  era.  Cicero  prophesied:  "There 
shall  no  longer  be  one  law  at  Rome,  and  another  at 
Athens;  nor  shall  it  decree  one  thing  to-day,  and  an- 

bk.  2,  ch.  4;  Davidson,  Aristotle,  bk.  1.,  ch.  4;  The  Nation,  March  24, 
1892,  pp.  230-231;  Zeller,  Socrates  and  the  Socratic  Schools,  ch.  3; 
Capes,  University  Life  in  Ancient  Athens,  ch.  1.;  Newman,  Hist. 
Sketches,  ch.  4.;  Thirlwell,  Hist,  of  Greece,  i.,  ch.  8. 

1  Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew,  ii.,  294-296;  Kirkpatrick,  Hist. 
Develop,  of  Super.  Instr.;  Am.  Jour,  of  Ed.,  xxiv.,  468-470. 

2  Gieseler,  i.,  §11. 

3  Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew,  i.,  bk.  7. 


Preparation  for  Christian  Church        43 


other  to-morrow;  but  one  and  the  same  law,  eternal 
and  immutable,  shall  be  prescribed  for  all  nations  and 
all  times,  and  the  God  who  shall  prescribe,  introduce, 
and  promulgate  this  law  shall  be  the  one  common 
Lord  and  Supreme  Ruler  of  all. " x 

The  Grecian  religion,2  so  closely  resembling  the 
Roman,  was  of  course  tolerated  in  the  Empire.  The 
gods  were  ideal  Greeks  with  virtues  and  vices  magni- 
fied. They  were  born,  had  passions,  senses,  and  bodies 
like  men,  but  never  died.  They  committed  crimes, 
had  troubles,  and  were  given  to  wrath,  hatred,  lust, 
cruelty,  perjury,  deception,  and  adultery,  yet  were 
omnipotent  and  omniscent. 3  While  the  conception  of 
Zeus,  as  the  father  of  the  gods,  ruled  by  fate,  had  a 
vague  idea  of  monotheism  in  it,  still  the  Greek  religion 
lacked  the  Christian  conception  of  sin  and  righteous- 
ness, for  with  the  Greeks  sin  was  only  a  folly  of  the 
understanding — even  the  gods  sinned.  Small  wonder 
then  that  Plato  banished  the  gods  from  his  ideal  re- 
public.4 Pindar,  Eschylus,  and  Sophocles  also  urged 
loftier  views  of  the  gods,  and  preached  a  higher  moral- 
ity. 5  With  the  Roman  conquest  national  honour 
and  patriotism  died  out,  and  superstition,  infidelity, 

«  About  the  Republic,  iii.,  6;  Virgil,  Eclogues,  iv.,  4-10;  13,  14; 
Lactantius,  Divine  Inst.,  vi.,  8;  Suetonius,  Life  of  Vesp.,  ch.  4; 
Tacitus,  Histories,  v.,  13. 

2  Gladstone,  Gods  and  Men  of  the  Heroic  Age;  Tyler,  Theol.  of  the 
Greeks;  Cocker,  Christ  and  Greek  Philos.;  Niebuhr,  Stories  of  Gr. 
Heroes;  Berens,  Myths  and  Legends  of  Anc.  Gr.;  Taylor,  Anc. 
Ideals;  Farnell,  Cults  of  the  Gr.  States;  Ely,  Olympus;  Francillon, 
Gods  and  Heroes;  Grbte;  Curtius;  Thirlwell. 

3  Read  Iliad,  Odyssey  and  Hesiod;  Theogeny. 
*  Concerning  the  Republic,  ii. 

s  Adam,  The  Religious  Teachers  of  Greece.  Edinb.,  1908.  Baur, 
The  Christian  Element  in  Plato,  Edinb.,  1861;  Hatch,  The,  Greek 
Influence  on  Christianity;  Hibbert  Lectures,  1888. 


44       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


refined  materialism,  and  outright  atheism  came  in.  The 
best  hearts  were  longing  for  a  new  and  purer  religion, 
and  were  ready  to  accept  it  when  it  came. 

The  Jews, i  intensely  religious,  with  several  thousand 
years  of  spiritual  history  back  of  them,  divided  the 
known  world  into  the  followers  of  the  true  God  and  the 
heathen  idolaters.  Even  they  were  separated  into 
factions : 

(i)  The  Pharisees,2  numbering  6000,  stoical  casu- 
ists, rigidly  orthodox,  prone  to  analyse  the  Mosaic  law 
to  death,  intensely  patriotic,  and  bitter  against  all 
non-Jewish  tendencies,  were  very  popular,  guided 
public  worship,  and  controlled  the  Jews  in  politics. 

(2)  The  Sadducees,3  rationalistic  and  skeptical, 
were  aristocratic  Epicureans  who  rejected  oral  tradi- 
tions, and  denied  resurrection,4  angels,5  and  an  all-ruling, 
foreknowing  Providence.  They  formed  a  smaller 
political  party  in  opposition  to  the  Pharisees,  held 
many  priestly  offices,  were  in  league  with  the  Romans, 
and  therefore  had  less  influence  with  the  people.6 

(3)  The  Essenes,7  a  mystic  brotherhood  of  4000 
whose  purpose  was  to  attain  holiness,  received    their 

1  Schurer,  Hist  of  Jewish  People;  Milman,  Hist  of  the  Jews; 
Stanley  Led.  on  Hist,  of  Jewish  Ch.;  Ewald,  Hist,  of  Jewish  People; 
Edersheim,  Prophecy  and  Hist,  in  Rel.  to  the  Messiah;  Kent,  Hist, 
of  Heb.  People;  Graetz,  Hist,  of  Jews;  Newman,  Christianity  in  its 
Cradle.     See  Josephus  for  full  account. 

2  Jewish  Encyc.  See  Josephus,  Antiq.,  xm.,  x.,  5,  6;  v.,  9;  xvn., 
ii.,  4;  xviii.,  i.,  2. 

3  Jewish  Encyc.  See  Josephus,  Antiq.,  xm.,  v.,  9;  x.,  6;  xviii., 
i.,  3;  Wars,  11.,  viii.,  14. 

*  Matt,  xxii.,  23;  Mark  xii.,  18;  Luke  xx.,  27;  Josephus,  Antiq., 
xviii.,  1,  4. 

s  Acts  xxiii.,  8. 

6  It  must  be  remembered  that  Nicodemus,  Gamaliel,  and  others 
came  from  this  class. 

»  Jewish  Encyc. 


Preparation  for  Christian  Church        45 


ideas  from  eastern  Theosophists ;  lived  communal 
lives  on  the  shores  of  the  Dead  Sea ;  took  the  Old  Testa- 
ment allegorically ;  wore  a  white  dress;  were  over- 
scrupulously  clean  for  the  purpose  of  purification ;  and 
rejected  animal  food,  bloody  sacrifices,  oaths,  slavery, 
and  marriage.  They  had  little  to  do  with  politics ;  were 
forerunners  of  Christian  monasticism;  and  may  have 
influenced  the  ideas  of  Jesus. * 

(4)  The  Samaritans, 2  in  origin  half  Jewish  and  half 
heathen  Babylonian,  practised  their  reformed  Judaism 
about  Gerizim  under  an  established  Levitical  priest- 
hood. They  rejected  all  Scriptures  but  the  Penta- 
teuch, held  pure  Messianic  expectations,  looked  with 
favour  upon  Christianity,  and  were  bitterly  hated 
by   the  orthodox  Jews.3 

(5)  The  Zealots,  led  by  Judas  of  Galilee,  a  sort  of 
a  nationalistic  party,  were  imbued  by  a  very  materi- 
alistic conception  of  the  hope  of  Israel.  They  sprang 
from  the  Pharisees  and  followed  them  in  religious 
things.  They  confidently  expected  the  realisation  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  the  Messiah,  and  a  new  Israel. 
In  their  patriotic  zeal  they  did  not  hesitate  to  use  the 
sword  and  dagger  to  drive  out  their  Roman  foes  in 
order  to  realise  their  dreams  for  a  purely  Jewish  king- 
dom. Their  followers  came  mostly  from  the  lowest 
classes.4 

(6)  The  common  people  accepted  the  Pharisees, 
in  a  general  way,  as  leaders.  They  believed  in  tradi- 
tion and  in  the  resurrection,  but  they  were  prone  to 

1  Josephus;  Philo;  Pliny;  Lightfoot,  Ep.  to  Gal.;  Schurer,  ii.,  188; 
Jewish  Encyc. 

2  Jewish  Encyc. 

3  John  iv.,  4,  viii.,  48;  Luke  ix.,  52,  53 ;  x.,  25-37. 

*  Josephus,  Antiq.,  xviii.,  i.,  1-6;  Rhees,  Life  of  Jesus;  Jewish 
Encyc;  Hastings,  Diet,  of  the  Bible. 


46       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


neglect  the  law  and  formalism  so  stoutly  insisted  upon 
by  the  scribes.  This  class  of  Jews  had  a  vital,  living 
fellowship  with  God,  and  might  be  called  pietists. 
Such  characters  as  Simeon  and  Anna,  Zachariah  and 
Elizabeth,  Joseph  and  Mary,  and  most  of  those  in- 
fluenced by  John's  call  to  repentance  were  of  this 
class.  They  stood  for  the  pure  religion  of  the  early 
prophets,  and  in  a  way  opposed  the  sacerdotalism  of 
the  Jewish  Church.  They  were  in  a  spiritual  and 
ethical  mood  to  accept  the  great  teachings  of  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  and  were  consequently  his  first  converts. 
While  they  constituted  the  majority  of  the  Jews, 
and  were  scattered  all  over  the  Roman  Empire  yet 
they  were  not  organised  as  a  political  party.  To 
these  Christianity  meant  a  great  and  much  needed 
reformation.  * 

The  moral  condition  of  the  Empire,  east  and  west, 
makes  a  dark  picture  as  drawn  by  such  men  as  Paul, 2 
Seneca,3  Tacitus,4  Juvenal,  Persius,  and  Sallust. 
"The  world  is  full  of  crimes  and  vices  "  moaned  Seneca. 
Foreign  conquest  and  plunder  brought  in  their  wake 
luxury,  sensuality,  cruelty,  and  licentiousness.  Sla- 
very was  fostered;  infanticide  tolerated; 'marriage  lax, 
and  divorce  shamefully  common.  Amusements  became 
bloody  and  brutal;  20,000  lives  were  sacrificed  in  one 
month  to  appease  the  populace,  who  cared  only  for 
"panem  et  circenses."  The  stern  virtue  and  moral- 
ity of  old  Greece  and  Rome    were   dead.     The   huge 

1  Schiirer,  Jewish  People,  div.  11. ,  ii.,  154-187;  Wendt,  Teachings 
of  Jesus,  i.,  33-89;  Graetz,  Hist,  of  the  Jews,  ii.,  122-123,  140-147; 
Edersheim,  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus,  i.,  160-179;  Rhees,  Life  of 
Jesus,  sec.  13;  Mathews,  Hist,  of     N.  T.  Times,  ch.  13. 

2  Rom.  i.,  18-32. 

3  De  Ira,  I.,  ii.,  c.  8. 

4  Politico,  1.,  ii.,  c.  2-18. 


Preparation  for  Christian  Church        47 


Empire  was  a  giant  body  without  a  soul  going  to  final 
destruction. 

It  is  evident,  then,  that  forces  both  positive  and 
negative  were  at  work  to  prepare  the  civilised  world 
for  the  reception  of  Christianity: 

(i)  The  universal  Empire  of    Rome  was  a  positive 
groundwork  for  the  universal  empire  of  the  Gospel. 
The  imperial  organisation  suggested  a  form  of  organisa- 
tion for  the  Church,  so  that  Latin  Christianity  was  \ 
simply   Rome    baptised.     The   unity   of   the    Empire  I 
afforded  concrete  illustration  of  God's  spiritual  king-  ! 
dom,  and  implied  fatherhood  and  brotherhood. l     Im- 
perial toleration  of  harmless  provincial  religions  pro- 
tected Christianity,  and  thus  enabled  it  to  get  a  foot- 
hold before  persecution  came.     Universal  peace  also 
was  a  boon  to  the  Christian  crusade. 

The  flourishing  commerce,  the  good  roads  uniting 
the  Empire,  the  extensive  travel,  and  the  various  mili- 
tary expeditions  all  made  the  spread  of  new  ideas 
easier  and  quicker. 

(2)  Pagan  theology  became  a  stepping-stone  to 
Christian  theology.2  The  decay  of  polytheism,  because 
of  its  unspiritual  and  unsatisfying  character,  made 
spiritual  monotheism  acceptable.  Pagan  temples, 
priests,  and  rites  made  the  conception  of,  and  the 
transition     to,    Christianity    easier.      Even    the    low 

»  Tacitus  felt  a  common  humanity  when  he  wrote:  "Homo  sum; 
humani  nihil  a  me  alienum  puto."  Cicero  and  Virgil  expressed 
like  ideas.  In  the  Middle  Ages  it  was  even  said  that  Virgil  in  the 
Fourth  Eclogue  prophesied  the  advent  of  Jesus.  See  Princeton 
Rev.,  Sept.  1879,  403  ff. 

2  Ackerman,  The  Christian  Element  in  Plato;  Cocker,  Christianity 
and  Greek  Philosophy ;  Hatch,  Influence  of  Greek  Ideas  and  Usages 
upon  the  Christian  Church;  Addis,  Christianity  and  the  Roman 
Empire,  22-25;  Farrar,  Seekers  after  God;  Davidson,  The  Stoic 
Creed,  N.  Y.  1907. 


48       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


moral   condition  and  widespread  skepticism  strongly 
emphasised  the  need  of  a  better  religion. 

(3)  The  schools  of  the  Empire  prepared  men's  minds 
for  an  intellectual  consideration  of  the  new  faith, 
though  not  necessarily  for  its  adoption.  The  Greek 
and  Latin  tongues  were  excellent  mediums  for  propa- 
gating the  new  doctrines.  Greek  particularly  was 
excellent  for  the  expression  of  abstract  and  lofty  truth, 
and  the  Old  Testament  had  been  translated  into  it 
more  than  two  centuries  before  Jesus. x  Grecian  elo- 
quence became  the  model  for  sacred  oratory.  The 
philosophy  of  Plato  and  Aristotle  formed  the  scientific 
basis  for  Christian  theology.  The  spiritual  flights  of 
Plato,2  the  religious  reflections  of  Plutarch,  and  the 
moral  precepts  of  Seneca  were  all  used  as  arguments 
of  revealed  religion.  Even  pagan  art,  with  its  love 
for  the  beautiful,  was  early  employed  to  give  material 
expression  to  Christian  ideas. 

(4)  The  Jews,  scattered  over  the  world,  3  befriended 
by  Julius  Caesar,  given  legal  status  as  a  sect  by  Augus- 
tus, expelled  in  vain  by  Tiberius  and  Claudius,  spread 
a  knowledge  of  the  living  God  over  the  whole  Empire 
before  Christ  appeared.  Synagogues  were  numerous, 
and  many  Gentiles  became  converts  to  monotheism.4 
These  converts  were  the  first  to  accept  the  teachings  of 
Jesus,  and  in  this  way  formed  the  nuclei  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church. 

Thus  Jerusalem  the  Holy  City,  Athens  the  city  of 
culture,  and  Rome  the  city  of  power,  combined  to  pre- 
pare the  world  so  that  the  matchless  ethical  and  relig- 

»  The  Septuagint  version,  284-247  B.C. 

2  Ackerman,  The  Christian  Element  in  Plato. 

3  Josephus  and  Strabo.     Gieseler,  i.,  §17. 
*  Apion,  ii.,  10,  39 


Preparation  for  Christian  Church        49 


ious  teaching  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  could  capture  the 
hearts  and  heads  of  men,  replace  the  national  religions, 
and  become  realised  in  the  outward  forms  and  inward 
beliefs  of  the  Christian  Church,  which  was  soon  to 
exercise  a  controlling  power  in  the  civilised  world. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — jewish: 

1. — Old  Testament. 

2. — Old  Testament  Apocrypha.     Transl.  by  E.  C. 

Bissell,  N.  Y.,  1865-80. 
3. — Josephus  (37-103  a.d.),  Antiquities,  and  The 
Jewish    War.     Various    eds.     Whiston    the 
standard. 
4. — Philo    Judaeus    (20    b.c.  -  40    a.d.),    Works. 
Transl.  by   C.  D.  Yonge.      In  Bohn,  Lond., 
1854-5.     4  vols. 
5. — The  Talmud.     Transl.  by  Bodkinson  and  re- 
vised by  Wise,  N.  Y.,  1896. 
6. — Lardner,    Jewish    and    Heathen    Testimonies. 
Works,  vii.,  Lond.,  1788. 
11. — pagan: 
1. — Greek: 

1. — The  classics.    Bohn  Lib.    Excellent.     Fine 

transl.  by  W.  H.  Appleton,  Bost.,  1893. 
2. — Polybius  (204-122  b.c),  Histories.    Transl. 
by  E.  S.  Schuckburgh.      2  vols.      Lond., 
1889. 
3. — Strabo     (62     b.c. -24      a.d.),     Geography. 
Transl.  by  Falconer  and  Hamilton,  Lond., 
1890.     2  vols.     Bohn  Lib. 
2. — Latin: 

1. — Virgil  (70-19    b.c).     Works.      Bohn  Lib., 

1894;  Morley  Univ.  Lib.,  1884. 
2. — Horace  (65-8  b.c),  Works.  Transl.  by 
Lonsdale  and  Lee,  Lond.,  1873.  Best  com- 
plete Eng.  ed.  is  by  Wickham.  2  vols. 
Oxf.,  1887,  1892. 
3. — Livy  (59  b.c.  -  17  a.d.),  Works.  Bohn 
Lib.,  1850.  Transl.  by  Stephenson,  Lond., 
1883-90. 


50       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


4. — Ovid  (43  B.c-17  a.d.),  Works.     Bohn  Lib. 

Transl.  by  H.  T.  Riley,  Lond.,  1852. 
5. — Lucan  (39-65  a.d.),  Pharsalia.     Transl.  by 

H.  T.  Riley,  Lond.,  1853.     Bohn  Lib. 
6. — Seneca    (3-65    a.d.),    Works.      Transl.    by 

T.    Lodge,    Lond.,    1620.     Bohn    Lib.   has 

partial  list. 
7. — Pliny    (61-115    a.d.),    Works.     Transl.    by 

Milmoth  and  Bosauquet,  Lond.,  1878. 
8. — Tacitus  (54-119  a.d.),  Works.     Bohn  Lib., 

1848.     2    vols.     Transl.    by    Church    and 

Brodribb,  Lond.,   1877. 
9. — Juvenal  (47-130  a.d.),  Works.     Bohn  Lib. 

Transl.  by  Strong  and  Leeper,  Lond.,  1882. 
10. — Suetonius  (75-160  a.d.),  Lives  of  the  Twelve 

Ccesars.     Bohn  Lib.,  1855.     Transl.  by  C. 

Whibley,  Lond.,  1899.     2  vols. 
in. — christian: 

1. — New  Testament.  (27  canonical  books). 

2. — New   Testament  Apocrypha.     In  Ante-Nic. 

Christ.  Lib.,  vol.  16. 
3. — Justin   Martyr    (103-164   a.d.),   Apologies. 

lb.,  vol.  ii.,  1-84;  Am.  ed.,  vol.  i. 
4. — Tertullian  (104-216  a.d.),  Apology.     Ante- 
Nic.  Christ.  Lib.,  xi.,  53-140.    Several  other 

transls. 
5. — Minicius  Felix  (?),  Octavius.     Ibid.,  xiii. 
6. — Eusebius   (d.    340),    The   Evangelical   Pre- 
paration.    Transl.    by    H.    Street,    Lond., 

1842. 
7. — St.  Augustine    (d.   430),    The   City  of  God. 

Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers.      Buf.,  1886-90. 

ii.,   16-621.     Other  transls. 

B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1.— Breed,  D.  R.,  A   History  of   the  Preparation 

of  the  World  for  Christ.     N.  Y.,  1893. 
2. — Dollinger,  J.  J.  I.,  The  Gentile  and   the  Jew. 

Lond.,  1862.     2  vols. 
3. — Fisher,    G.    P.,    Beginnings    of    Christianity. 

N.  Y.,  1877. 
4. — Hard  wick,    C,     Christ    and    Other    Masters. 

Lond.,   1875.     2  vols. 


Preparation  for  Christian  Church        51 


5. — Hausrath,  A.,  History  of  the  New  Testament 

Times.     Lond.,  1895.     4  vols. 
6. — Maurice,  F.  D.,  Religions  of  the  World.     Lond. 

and  Bost.,  1854. 
7. — Pressense\  De   E.,   Religions    before    Christ. 

Edinb.,  1862. 
8. — Shahan,  J.  T.,  The  Beginnings  of  Christianity. 

N.  Y.,  1904. 
9. — Trench,  R.  C,  Christ  the  Desire  of  all  Nations. 

Camb.,  1846. 
10. — Uhlhorn,    G.,    Conflict   of    Christianity   with 

Heathenism.     Lond.,   1880. 
11. — Wernle,  P.,  The  Beginnings  of  Christianity. 

Lond.,  1908.     2  vols. 
IX. — general: 

Alzog,  i.,  §  24-31.  Backhouse,  E.,  Early  Ch. 
Hist.,  ch.  1.  Baur,  i.,  1-43.  Blunt,  J.  H.,  Key 
to  Ch.  Hist.,  ch.  1.  Bouzique,  i.,  Intr.  Burton, 
E.,  Lects.  on  Eccles.  Hist,  (to  3d  cent.).  Catterille, 
H.,  Genesis  of  the  Ch.,  ch.  1.  Cheetham,  ch.  1. 
Cox,  H.,  First  Cent,  of  Christianity,  i.,  chs.  1-10. 
Darras,  i.,  ch.  1.  Dollinger,  Hist,  of  the  Ch.,  i., 
ch.  1,  sec.  1-2.  Duff,  ch.  1-6.  Farrar,  F.  W., 
Early  Days  of  Christianity,  bk.  i.,  ch.  1.  Fisher, 
pd.  i.,  ch.  1.  Gibbon,  i.-ii.  Gieseler,  i.,  sec. 
8-19.  Gilmartin,  i.,  sec.  2-3.  Guericke,  pp. 
21-28.  Hase,  13-23.  Hurst,  i.,  61-87.  Jackson, 
F.  J.  F.,  Hist,  of  the  Christ.  Ch.  (to  461),  ch.  2. 
Janes,  L.  G.,  A  Study  of  Prim.  Christ.,  chs.  1-2. 
Killen,  ch.  1.  Kurtz,  i.,  sec.  6-12.  Milman, 
Hist,  of  Christ,  (to  4th  cent.),  ch.  1.  Milner,  i., 
cent.  i.  Moeller,  i.,  26-48.  Mosheim,  11-30. 
Neander,  i.,  1-69.  Robertson,  bk.  i.,  ch.  1. 
Schaff,  i.,  ch.  1.     Waddington,  ch.  1. 


CHAPTER  IV 

ORIGIN,    SPREAD,     AND    ORGANISATION    OF    THE     CHURCH 
DURING  THE  APOSTOLIC  AGE 

Outline:  I. — Origin  of  the  Christian  Church.  II. — Spread  of 
the  Apostolic  Church.  III. — Organisation  of  the  Early  Church. 
IV. — Conclusions.     V. — Sources. 

THE  Christian  Church  has  both  an  internal  and  an 
external  side — a  soul  and  a  body.  Thoughts, 
feelings,  and  beliefs  constitute  the  inner  Church, 
the  creed.  These,  in  turn,  aided  by  physical  conditions, 
determine  the  outward  organisation  of  the  Church. 
In  a  broad  sense  the  Church  was  a  product  of  certain 
forces  already  in  the  world  at  the  opening  of  the  Christ- 
ian era,  which  were  utilised  by  the  believers  in  the 
teachings  of  Jesus.  From  pagan  and  Jewish  sources 
contributions  were  made  to  both  the  form  and  content 
of  the  Christian  Church  in  the  following  ways: 

i .  The  Jews !  gave  in  ideas :  (a)  a  belief  in  Jehovah 
as  God.  (b)  the  conception  of  sin,  (c)  a  consciousness  of 
the  need  of  repentance  and  reconciliation,  (dj  the 
doctrine  of  immortality,  (e)  the  conception  of  Heaven 
and  Hell,  (f)  angels  and  the  devil,  (g)  miracles,  (h)  the 
Old  Testament  as  God's  word,  and  (i)  the  Sabbath. 
To  the  form  of  the  Christian  Church  they  suggested: 

1  Jewish  Encyc;  Sorley,  Jewish  Christians  and  Judaism,  London, 
1881;  Bettany,  History  of  Judaism  and  Christianity,  London,  1892; 
A  History  of  Jews  in  Rome,  B.C.  160 -A.D.  604,  London,  1882; 
Toy,  C.  H.,  Judaism  and  Christianity,  Boston,  1891. 

52 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       53 


(a)  the  synagogue,  (b)  officials  like  the  elders,  (c)  cere- 
monies, (d)  feasts,1  and  (e)  organisation.2 

2 .  The  pagans  contributed  in  ideas :  (a)  Greek  phi- 
losophy and  culture,3  (b)  concepts  of  morality, 4  (c)  the 
idea  of  absolute  sovereignty,  and  (d)  universality.5 
In  form  they  gave :  (a)  local  organisations  like  the  demo- 
cratic Hellenistic  guild  or  municipality, 6  or  the  numer- 
ous Roman  social  or  religious  associations  known  as 
collegia  and  sodalitia  (especially  the  collegia  juner- 
aticia),  and  the  general  organisation  of  the  Empire7; 

(b)  rites  and  ceremonies;  (c)  the  evening  meal,8  (d) 
festivals  like  Easter  and  Christmas ;  (e)  the  use  of  im- 
ages, and  (f)  architecture,  painting,  and  ornamentation. 

3.  The  real  founder  of  the  Church,  however,  was 
Jesus  Christ.  He  supplied  the  fundamental  ideas  of: 
(a)  the  universal  fatherhood  of  God,  (b)  the  divine 
sonship  of  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  (c)  the  brotherhood 
of  man,  and  (d)  the  ethical  law  of  self-sacrifice.  He 
created  the  Church:  (a)  by  choosing  twelve  Apostles, 
by  teaching  them  and  by  commissioning  them  to  con- 
tinue the  work;  (b)  by  winning  a  number  of  converts 
to  His  doctrines ;  (c)  by  leaving  certain  sacraments  for 
His  followers — Catholics  say  seven;  most  Protestants, 
two.     But  He  left  no  written  Church  constitution  giving 

1  Moeller,  i.,  69. 

2  Moeller,  i.,  55,  66. 

3  Kurtz,  Sec.  7,  No.  4. 

4  See  Cicero,  Seneca,  Epictetus,  and  Marcus  Aurelius.  Read 
Baur,  i.,  10-17,  Kurtz,  Sec.  7,  No.  2;  cf.  Foucard,  Lcs  associations 
relig.  chez  les  Grecs,  Paris,  1873. 

5  Kurtz,  Sec.  7,  No.  5. 

6  Hatch,  26-39;  Kurtz,  Sec.  17,  Nos.  2,  3;  Moeller,  i.,  66. 

7  Tertullian,  Apol.,  ch.  38,  39;  cf.  Mommsen,  De  collegiis  et 
sodal.  Rom.,  Kil.,  1843. 

8  Xenophon,  Memorabil.,  iii.,  14;  Athenaeus,  Deipnos,  vii.,  7, 
68,  p.  365a;  Fouard,  St.  Peter,  363. 


54       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  details  of  organisation.  The  work  of  Jesus  and  His 
immediate  followers  in  founding  the  Church  is  de- 
scribed in  the  New  Testament.  Broadly,  then,  the 
Church  of  Jesus  Christ  is  composed  of  all  the  believers 
in  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  although  differing  greatly  in 
interpretation  and  in  organisation . 1 

From  Jerusalem  the  Apostles  and  disciples  of  Jesus 
spread  his  teachings  to  Syria,  Asia  Minor,  Africa,  Greece, 
and  Rome.  From  these  fields  the  propagation  was  con- 
tinued until  by  the  time  of  Constantine  every  point 
within  and  some  places  without  the  Empire  were 
reached.  "Throughout  every  city  and  village,"  en- 
thusiastically exclaimed  Eusebius,  "churches  were 
quickly  established  and  filled  with  members  from 
every  people."2  The  fruitful  labours  of  Paul  and 
Timothy  were  explained  thus:  "And  so  were  the 
churches  established  in  the  faith,  and  increased  in 
numbers  daily."3  Other  Apostles  were,  no  doubt, 
equally  active  in  various  parts  of  the  Empire.  The 
"Christians" — a  term  of  derision  first  used  by  the 
heathen  of  Antioch," — numbering  500  in  30  a.d.,5  grew 
to  500,000  by  100  a.d.,6  and  increased  to  30,000,000 
by  311  a.d.7 — a  growth  almost  unparalleled  in  the 
world's  religious  history.  They  included  all  the  social 
classes  in  the  Empire  from  slave  to  Emperor,  though 

1  1  Cor.  i.,  2.  Illustration  of  this  variation  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  Calvinists  and  most  Protestants  believe  the  Church  to  be  an 
invisible  organisation,  while  Catholics,  Lutherans,  Anglicans,  and 
oriental  Christians  hold  it  to  be  visible. 

2  Euseb.,  bk.  ii.,  ch.  3. 

3  Acts  xvi.,  5;  cf.  Acts  ii.,  47. 

4  Euseb.,  bk.  ii.,  ch.  3;  cf.  Acts  xi.,  26. 

5  Gieseler,  i.,  72. 

6  Schaff,  i.,  196. 

7  Orr,  Neglected  Factors,  23-91.  Schaff,  197,  gives  only  12,000,000. 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       55 

the  great  middle  class  was  in  all  probability  most 
numerously  represented. 1 

The  causes  for  this  marvellous  growth2  are  found  in : 

(a)  the  revolutionary  teachings  of  Jesus,  particularly 
the  idea  of  immortality,  which  was  very  vague  in 
heathen  minds,  and  the  law  of  love  and  self-sacrifice; 

(b)  the  miraculous  powers  attributed  to  the  first  Christ- 
ians; (c)  the  purer  and  austerer  morality  of  the  early 
Christians ;  (d)  the  unity  and  discipline  of  the  Church, 
making  it  a  powerful  organisation  within  the  Empire ; 
(e)  the  preparation  and  ripeness  of  the  Empire  for 
Christianity,  and  (f)  the  subjective  vividness  of  the 
constant  presence  of  Jesus  with  the  early  Christians, 
as  explained  by  Paul,  and  their  zealous  propagandism. 

The  results  of  this  new  life,  brought  into  the  world 
so  dramatically,  must  be  measured  in  terms  of  all 
subsequent  history. 3  Every  institution  in  the  Empire 
was  modified  by  this  new  spiritual  force-*  so  that  as  old 
pagan  imperial  Rome  gradually  fell,  new  Christian 
Rome  took  its  place  to  rule  all  western  Europe  for 
more  than  a  thousand  years  in  every  sphere  of  human 
activity  and  endeavour. 

The  exact  form  of  the  organisation  of  the  early 
Christian  Church  is  extremely  difficult  to  determine, 
because  of  the  lack  of  sufficient  positive  authority  in 
the  New  Testament  and  in  patristic  literature.  The 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  letters  of  Paul  and 
others  to  the  first  Christian  communities  tell  nearly  all 

1  Orr,  Neglected  Factors,  95-163. 
*     2  See  Gibbon's  "famous  infamous,"  ch.  15. 

3  Church,    R.    W.,    Civilisation    before    and    after    Christianity 
N.  Y.,  1872. 

«  See  the  works  of  Troplong,  Schmidt,  Uhlhorn,  Lecky,  Brace, 
Milman,  Pressense,  etc. 


56       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


any  one  can  know  about  the  origin  and  organisation 
of  the  Apostolic  Church.  From  these  sources  it  is 
clear  that  Jesus  left  certain  great  teachings,  and  many 
devoted  believers  in  those  truths.  After  His  departure, 
the  Apostles,  not  limited  to  twelve,1  receiving  authority 
directly  from  the  Master,2  like  the  prophets  of  old, 
spread  the  new  pregnant  faith  over  the  world,  organ- 
ised their  converts  according  to  individual  ideas  and 
local  needs, 3  and  practically  monopolised  all  direction 
of  the  Church.4  With  the  increase  of  these  Christian 
societies  in  size  and  numbers,  came  the  necessity  of 
appointing  local  officers,  or  of  having  them  elected  by 
the  "brethren."  In  this  way,  at  an  early  date,  began 
the  outward  organisation  of  the  Church.  The  develop- 
ment of  the  Jewish  Kingdom  of  God  into  the  Ecclesia 
of  the  Christians  was  a  comparatively  easy  transition, 
especially  for  the  Jewish  converts. 

Next  to  the  Apostles  in  point  of  time,  but  not  au- 
thority, in  the  Biblical  account,  came  the  deacons. 
At  Jerusalem  the  Apostles  had  the  "brethren"  select 
"seven  men  of  honest  report"  to  minister  to  the  poor 
and  unfortunate,  and  to  wait  on  the  table  in  the  daily 
love-feasts.5  They  were  installed  by  "laying  on  of 
hands."  This  democratic  example  apparently  was 
followed  elsewhere.6  Both  sexes  were  eligible.7  The 
high  qualifications  for  the  office  suggest  its  importance.8 

1  i  Cor.  ix.,  i,  5;  xii.,  28,  29;  xv.,  5,  7;  Rom.  xvi.,  7. 

2  1  Cor.  xi.,  23;  xii.,  3-8;  2  Cor.  x.,  8;  xiii.,  10;  Gal.  i.,  8,  9,  12; 
Eph.  iv.,  11. 

3  Acts  xiv.,  23;  Tit.  i.,  5. 
♦Acts  ii.,  42;  iv.,  35,  37;  v.,  2. 

5  Acts  vi.,    1-6. 

6  Phil,  i.,  1;  1  Tim.  iii.,  8;  iv.  14. 
'Rom.  xvi.,  1. 

8  Acts  vi.,  1-6;  1  Tim.  Hi.,  8-13. 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       57 


St.  Paul  tells  us  that  the  earliest  Christian  commun- 
ities found  it  necessary  to  have  some  organisation, 
hence  they  chose  bishops,  or  overseers,  and  presbyters, 
or  elders.     But  throughout  the  New  Testament  the^ 
words  elder,  presbyter,  and  bishop  seem  to  be  used 
interchangeably.1     The   qualifications   for  the   offices* 
were  the  same.     Bishops  and  elders  are  never  joined** 
together  like  bishops  and  deacons  as  if  they  were  two  % 
distinct    classes    of   officers.     Timothy,    for    example,  J 
appoints  bishops  and  deacons ;  Titus,  elders  and  deacons. 
Paul  sends  greetings  to  bishops  and  deacons  at  Philippi, 
but  omits  all  mention  of  elders  and  presbyters  because, 
presumably,  they  were  included  in  the  conception  of 
bishops.2     In  his   pastoral   epistles   he    describes   all 
Church    officers,    but     mentions     only    two     classes, 
bishops  or  elders,    and  deacons.3       Peter,   who  calls 
himself  "also  an  elder,"  urges  the  elders  to  "tend  the 
flock  of  God"  and  to  "fulfil  the  office  of  bishop. "* 
Even  Clement   of   Rome   uses   bishop  and    presbyter 
interchangeably  as  late  as  95  a.d.s     Irenseus  (d.  190) 
and  Tertullian  (d.  220),  however,  were  conscious  of  a 
distinct  division  and  differentiation. 

That  the  official  titles,  bishop  and  presbyter  or  elder, 
were  used  from  early  apostolic  days,  all  must  admit, 
for  the  New  Testament  evidence  is  unmistakable.  But 
perplexity  and  doubt  arise  at  once  when  an  attempt  is 
made  to  determine  the  resemblances  and  differences 

»  Acts  xv.,  23;  xvi.,  4;  xx.,  17,28;  Phil,  i.,  i;  i  Tim.  iii.;  iv.,  14; 
v.,  17-19;  Tit.  i.,  5-7;  James  v.,  14;  Clement,  To  Corinth,  xlii.,  44. 
Cf.  Rev.  iv.,  4;  v.,  5,  6;  vii.,  11,  13. 

2  Phil,  i.,  1. 

s  1  Tim.  iii.,  1-13;  v.,  17-19;  Tit.  i.,  5-7;  Heb.  xi.,  2. 

«  1  Pet.  v.,  1-2. 

5  To  Corinth,  ch.  xliii.  The  Didache  and  Shepherd  of  Hermas 
offer  additional  testimony  on  this  point. 


58       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


in  their  duties  and  powers.  The  term  elder,  or  presby- 
ter, may  have  been  used  merely  to  designate  the  per- 
sonal relation  of  the  most  highly  respected  members  to 
the  congregation,  while  the  name  bishop,  or  overseer, 
may  have  been  the  official  designation  of  leadership. 
Indeed  some  scholars,  like  Hatch  and  Harnack,  believe 
that  the  functions  of  presbyters  and  bishops  were  dis- 
tinct and  different  from  the  beginning.  They  assert 
that  the  college  of  presbyters  assumed  the  leadership, 
or  government  proper,  of  the  Christian  community, 
with  jurisdiction  and  disciplinary  power,  while  the 
bishops  had  charge  of  the  administration  of  the 
Church,  including  worship  and  finance,  and  were  also 
largely  occupied  with  charitable  work,  in  co-oper- 
ation with  the  deacons,  such  as  care  ,  for  the  sick, 
the  poor,  and  strangers.  According  to  this  view 
each  congregation  was  organised  with  three  sets  of 
officers,  namely,  deacons,  presbyters,  and  bishops, 
from  the  very  outset.  Gradually,  however,  an  amal- 
gamation took  place.  The  bishops,  with  their 
practical  information,  received  seats  and  votes  in 
the  presbytery  and  finally  came  to  fill  the  office  of 
presidency. 

It  seems  more  probable,  on  the  contrary,  that  these 
two  titles  simply  signify  the  twofold  origin  of  the  early 
Christians,  namely,  from  the  Jews  and  the  pagans.  The 
word  presbyter  is  of  Hebraic  derivation,  while  bishop 
is  a  pure  Greek  term.  Consequently  the  tendency 
developed  to  use  presbyter  wherever  the  Hebrew 
element  predominated,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to 
employ  bishop  for  Greek  communities.  It  was  but 
natural,  too,  that  these  two  terms  should  nome  to 
signify  the  same  thing  and  should  come  to  be  used 
interchangeably . 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       59 


The  derivation  of  these  terms  is  not  clear. l  Both 
presbyter  and  bishop  appear  to  have  been  in  use  in 
Syria  and  Asia  Minor  to  designate  officers  of  muni- 
cipal and  private  corporations.  In  Grecian  civic  or- 
ganisations, the  word  bishop  or  superintendent  was 
likewise  commonly  used.  Then  there  were  the  well- 
known  elders  of  the  Jewish  synagogue,2  and  the 
senators  of  Roman  municipalities — in  fact  a  universal 
respect  for  seniority  existed  in  the  old  world.  It  was 
very  natural,  therefore,  that  the  Christians  should 
adopt  the  known  forms,  names,  and  offices  of  those 
organisations  with  which  they  were  familiar.3  This 
method  of  procedure  is  precisely  the  one  followed  over 
the  world  to-day  in  propagating  any  idea  through 
organised  effort. 

These  elders  were  apparently  organised  into  boards, 
or  councils,  for  the  purpose  of  better  furthering  the 
interests  of  the  Church.  They  were  not  teachers  at 
first  so  much  as  the  administrators,  or  business  man- 
agers, of  the  general  concerns  of  the  Church.4  They 
helped  to  enact  ordinances  s ;  discussed  important 
questions  with  the  Apostles  and  assisted  them  in  every 
possible  way;  enforced  discipline6;  settled  disputes 
between  Christians;  and  prayed  for  the  sick  and 
anointed  them. 7 

The  first  Christians,  eagerly  awaiting  the  literal  second 

1  See  various  dictionaries  of  the  Bible. 

J  Ex.  xxiv.,  1;  Num.  xi.,  16;  Gen.  1.,  7-8;  Lev.  iv.,  15;  Deut.  xxi., 
19;  1  Sam.  xvi.,  4;  Ezra  v.,  5;  Psalm  cvii.,  32;  Ezek.  viii.,  1;  Acts 
iv.,  8;  Matt,  xxi.,  23;  xxvii.,  1;  Luke  xxii.,  66. 

3  Hatch,  62-66. 

*  Hatch,  69-73;  Acts  xx.,  28-31;  1  Pet.  v.,  1;  1  Tim.  v.,  17. 

5Acts  xvi.,  4. 

«  Acts  xx.,  29-31,  35;  Tertullian,  Apol.,  39. 

1  James  v.,   14. 


6o      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


coming  of  Christ,  and  imbued  with  great  enthusiasm 
for  the  Gospel,  did  not  feel  the  need  of  an  elaborate  con- 
stitution. But  in  time,  as  numbers  increased,  as  severe"" 
persecution  fell  upon  the  Christians,  and  as  the  original 
fervour  and  spirituality  decreased  with  the  conversion 
of  so  many  pagans,  it  became  necessary  to  develop  a 
regular  system  of  Church  government,  which  would_ 
more  effectively  meet  the  new  conditions.  The  fact 
of  differentiation  in  organisation  is  easily  established, 
because  the  earliest  and  later  forms  may  be  determined 
with  reasonable  accuracy,  but  the  transitional  process 
is  much  more  difficult  of  comprehension.  This  evo- 
lution, however,  appears  to  have  taken  this  course : 

i.  The  board  of  presbyters,  at  least  in  the  larger 
congregations,  naturally  and  logically  developed  a 
head  with  a  priority  in  rank.  The  office  of  president 
was  universal  in  contemporary  Jewish  associations, 
and  in  Roman  and  Greek  organisations.  The  creation' 
of  a  chairman  of  the  administrative  body  became  a  po- 
litical necessity  to  expedite  business,  and  to  enforce 
discipline  in  the  Christian  societies.  Moreover  there 
was  the  example  of  the  Apostles,  who  actually  desig- 
nated officers  to  continue  their  work  (a)  of  teaching 
the  true  doctrines,1  (b)  of  organising  new  churches, 
(c)  of  ordaining  deacons  and  elders,  and  (d)  in  act- 
ing as  head  of  the  whole  congregation.2  Hence 
this  change  was  natural,  imperative,  and  easy;  but 
the  transition  must  have  been  gradual  and  must 
have  lacked  uniformity. 

2.  The  president  of  the  board  of  presbyters  came, 
in  course  of  time,  to  have  a  recognised  supremacy  in 
power  as  well  as  in  rank,  and  the  title  of  bishop  was 

i  i  Tim.  i.,  3. 
5  Tit.  i.,  5. 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       61 

t  gradually  restricted  to  his  high  office.     After  the  death 
of   the  Apostles  more  duties  devolved  upon  the  presi- 
dent of  the  council,  and  it  was  in  the  course  of  things 
that  the  special  word  bishop,  i.  e.,  overseer  or  super- 
intendent, should  be  applied  to  him.     By  the  second 
century,  at  least,  if  not  indeed  before,  the  differentia- 
tion had  begun  and  from  that  time  on  it  can  be  plainly 
traced  in  the  Church  Fathers.     Jerome  states  that  at 
Alexandria  until  the  middle  of  the  third  century  the 
presbyters  elected  one   of  their  number  as   president 
and  called  him  bishop. l     Hilarius  says:  "Every  bishop 
is  a  presbyter,  but  not  every  presbyter  a  bishop;  for 
he  only  is  bishop  who  is  the  primate  among  the  pres- 
byters."2    Examples,  secular  and  ecclesiastical,  were 
not  lacking  to  warrant  the  change :  (a)  the  Old  Testa- 
ment priesthood,  (b)  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  (c)  the 
Apostles  and  their  appointees,  (d)  the  Emperor  and 
his  officials.     The  bishop  soon  professed  to  occupy  the 
place  of  an  Apostle  instead  of  Christ  as  earlier,  hence 
arose  the  idea  of  an  "Apostolic  seat"  and  "Apostolic 
succession."3     He  represented  Christian  unity  of  doc- 
trine and  discipline,  and  ruled  over  a  recognised  terri- 
tory— first  a  single  church,  then  a  city,  then  a  province. 
From  the  bishop  it  was  only  another  step  to  the  arch- 
bishop, the  metropolitan,  the  patriarch,  and  the  Pope. 
3.     The    position    of   the    presbyter    changes,   like- 
wise,  from  that  of  the  highest  officer  in  the  Church 
to  one  subordinate   (a)    to   the  board   of   elders  and 
then     (b)     to     the     bishop.      This    distinction    once 
made    between   bishop    and    presbyter,    there   was   a 

1  Ep.  146,  Ad  Evangelum;    cf.Ep.   82    and   84.      Apost.   Const., 
iii.,  c.  11. 

2  1  Ep.  to  Timoth.,  c.  3. 

3  Hatch,  106-109. 


62      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


tendency  for  the  bishops  to  usurp  more  and  more 
power,  while  the  presbyters  opposed  it.  The  third 
century  is  full  of  these  quarrels. l  Here  began  the 
conflict  between  the  principles  of  monarchy  and  aristo- 
cracy in  the  Church.  Soon,  from  acting  as  a  member 
of  a  council,  the  presbyter  came  to  act  alone  under  the 
bishop — i.  e.,  the  presbyter  became  a  priest,  just  as  the 
president  became  a  bishop.  Presbyters  also  assumed 
new  functions:  (a)  "ministry  of  the  word"  and  (b) 
"ministry  of  the  sacraments."  New  detached  com- 
munities were  ruled  not  infrequently  by  single  presby- 
ters under  the  city  bishop.  Indeed  it  seems  that  from 
the  outset  the  smaller  and  weaker  Christian  commun- 
ities were  ruled  by  single  elders. 

4.  The  status  and  functions  of  the  deacon  likewise 
were  altered.  At  first  he  visited  the  sick  and  unfor- 
tunate, collected  and  disbursed  alms,  and  reported  on 
discipline.  Stephen  taught;  Philip  baptised.  With 
the  growth  of  Christian  civilisation,  however,  institu- 
tions of  relief — hospitals,  orphanages,  infant  asylums, 
almshouses,  poorhouses,  guest-houses,  etc. — took  the 
place  of  the  earlier  personal  ministrations  of  the  dea- 
cons. Each  institution  had  its  own  head,  not  neces- 
sarily a  deacon.  From  being  distributors  of  alms, 
therefore,  the  deacon  first  became  an  assistant  of  the 
bishop, 2  and  later  the  chief  helper  of  the  priest  in  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments.  With  the  multi- 
plication of  the  duties  of  this  office  came  the  arch- 
deacons and  subdeacons. 

5.  The  many  duties  incident  to  a  complex  organ- 
isation gradually  produced  a  new  set  of  subordinate 
officials — the   minor   orders:    (a)    lectors  to   read   the 

"Neander,   i.,    192,  193. 
2  Hatch,  54. 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       63 


Scriptures  in  public  and  to  keep  the  books,  (b)  acolytes 
to  assist  the  bishops,  (c)  exorcists  to  pray  for  those 
possessed  of  evil  spirits,  (d)  janitors  to  care  for  the 
buildings  and  preserve  order,  (e)  precentors  to  conduct 
public  praise  service,  (f)  catechists  to  instruct  the  cate- 
chumens, (g)  interpreters  to  translate  the  Scripture 
lesson. l 

6.  The  clergy  came  to  be  distinct  from  the  laity — 
a  sacerdotal  class  was  developed.  In  the  early  Church 
the  priesthood  was  universal,  i.  e.,  laymen  as  well  as 
Church  officers  could  preach,  baptise,  administer  the 
sacraments,  and  exercise  discipline.  The  relation  of 
clergy  to  laity  was  merely  that  of  leadership  as  in  non- 
Christian  organisations.  "Ordination"  simply  meant 
appointment,  and  was  used  in  civic  installations,  while 
"laying  on  of  hands"  was  only  a  symbol  of  prayer  and 
even  used  by  the  Jews  for  secular  affairs. 

Gradually,  however,  the  tendency  to  put  the  Church 
officials  above  the  laity  grew  stronger  until  something 
akin  to  the  Old  Testament  idea  of  the  priesthood  was 
revived.  By  the  fourth  century  the  Church  officers 
had  lost  their  primitive  character  and  had  become  a 
separate  class  mediating  between  God  and  man.  The 
causes  of  this  separation  are  not  difficult  to  see,  namely : 
(a)  the  peculiar  duties  of  the  Church  officials  tended, 
to  give  them  a  distinct  character ;  (b)  the  persecutions 
to  which  the  Roman  government  subjected  them  threw 
them  into  conspicuous  relief;  (c)  the  legalisation  of 
Christianity  bestowed  upon  them  a  distinct  civil  status, 
made  them  immune  from  public  burdens  like  taxes  and 
military  service,  exempted  them  from  civil  courts,  and 
permitted  them  to  acquire  property;  and  (d)  the  rise 

1  Euseb.,  vi.,  43;  Neander,  i.,  §2;  Kurtz,  i.,  §34;  Alzog,  i.,  §83; 
Moeller,  i.,  234. 


64       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


of  asceticism  forced  the  clergy  to  observe  a  code  of 
morals  different  from  that  of  the  laity,  demanded  celi- 
bacy, originated  the  badge  of  the  tonsure,  and  created 
clergy-houses. 

The  laity  were  early  organised  in  congregations. 
Membership  in  the  Church  was  open  to  all  believers 
in  Jesus.  The  election  of  officers  was,  for  the  most  part, 
democratic.  The  life  of  each  congregation  was  social- 
istic and  communistic.  All  possessions  were  sold  for 
the  common  good  and  to  create  a  common  fund  for  the 
needy. l  The  members  enjoyed  a  common  evening  meal 
and  their  common  love-feast  which  was  to  them  the 
highest  act  of  worship. 2  Disobedience,  or  infidelity, 
might  be  punished  by  private  admonition,  public  cor- 
rection, and  in  stubborn  cases  excommunication.  3 
But  after  the  first  century  these  communistic-demo- 
cratic societies  were  gradually  replaced  by  a  hierarchical 
organisation  with  new  or  modified  institutions.  The 
monarchio-episcopal  principle  of  church  government 
was  gradually  evolved  but,  nevertheless,  much  of  the 
primitive  democracy  remained.  This  evolution  in  the 
government  of  the  Church  may  be  clearly  seen  by  the 
end  of  the  second  century. 

From    this    discussion    these    conclusions    may  be 

drawn : 

i.  The  New  Testament  does  not  furnish  a  satis- 
factory model  for  any  one  distinct  organisation  of  the 
Christian  Church. 

2.  In  the  New  Testament,  however,  are  found  the 
germs  from  which  sprang  deacons,  priests,  bishops, 
metropolitans,  patriarchs,  and  popes. 

»  Acts  ii.,  44,  45- 

2  Acts  ii.,  42,  46. 

3  Mat.  xviii.,  15-18;  Tit.  iii.,  10;  1  Cor.  v.,  5. 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       65 


3 .  The  elements  from  which  the  Church  was  organ- 
ised already  existed  in  large  measure  in  human  society. 
Hence  the  Church,  in  its  outward  form,  had  a  natural 
historical  growth  and  was  influenced  by  (a)  the  Jewish 
synagogue,  (b)  Greek  municipalities,  (c)  the  Roman 
government,  (d)  local  needs,  and  (e)  the  conditions  of 
the  times.  The  animating  principle  and  causal  inspira- 
tion was  Christianity. 

4.  Christian  society,  like  human  society,  was  subject 
to  constant  change  which  is  easily  detected.  The 
form  of  organisation,  originally  democratic,  was  gradu- 
ally changed  by  the  force  of  circumstances  until  it 
became  monarehial  and  at  the  same  time  the  officers 
underwent  a  similar  transformation. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — jewish: 

1. — Josephus,  Jewish  War,  Against  Apion,  Autobi- 
ography, Whiston  ed. 
2. — Philo  Judaeus.     Works.     4  vols.     Bohn   Lib., 

i854-5- 
3. — Talmud.     Transl.    by     Rodkinson;    rev.    by 
Wise,  N.  Y.,  1896. 
11. — heathen: 

1.  Lucan,  Pliny,  Tacitus,  Suetonius.     See  Chap. 
III.  of  this  work 

2.  Celsus    (c.    178  a.d.),  Against  the  Christians. 
Transl.  by  Lardner,  Lond.,  1830. 

3.  Porphyry  (d.  306),  Against  the  Christians.     lb. 

4.  Julian   (d.   363),  Against  the  Christians.     lb. 

Also  Transl.  by  Nevins,  Lond.,  1873.    Works. 

Bohn    Lib.,    1888.     Transl.    by    Duncombe, 

Lond.,     1784.     Public    Letters.     Transl.    by 

Chinnock,  Lond.,  1901. 
in. — christian: 

1. — New  Testament  (27  canonical  books). 

2. — New    Testament    Apocrypha.      ScharT,  i.,   188. 

Transl.  in  Ante-Nic.  Christ.  Lib.,  vol.  xvi. 


66      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


i. — Acts.     Transl.  by  Phillips,  Lond.,  1876. 
2. — Epistles — 6  by  Paul  and  8  by  Seneca. 
3. — Apocalypses — of  the  Apostles. 

3. — Apostolic  Fathers: 

1. — Clement  of  Rome  (97?),  Epist.  to  the  Ch. 
of  Corinth.  Best  ed.  by  Lightfoot,  Apost. 
Fathers,  N.  Y.  1891. 

2. — Ignatius  (d.  70-115),  Epistles  (7).  lb.  See 
Killen. 

3. — Barnabas (?),  Epistle.  Lightfoot;  Cunning- 
ham. 

4. — Polycarp  (d.  156),  Epistle.  Lightfoot;  Jack- 
son. 

5. — Papias  (d.  153?),  Fragments.  Lightfoot; 
Hall. 

6. — Shepherd  of  Hermas(?_).     Lightfoot;  Hoole. 

7. — Didache(t).     Hoole;  Hitchcock. 

4. — Post- Apostolic  Fathers : 

1. — Justin  Martyr   (d.  164  ?),  Works.  Ante-Nic. 

Christ.  Lib.,  ii. ;  Am.  ed.,  i. 
2. — Irenaeus    (d.    202  ?),    Works,     lb.,    v.,    ix.; 

Am.  ed.,  i. ;  Fathers  of  the  Holy  Cath.  Ch., 

ch.  42. 
3. — Hippolytus(P),    Works.    Ante-Nic.    Christ. 

Lib.,  ii.,  130;  vi.,  15-403. 
4. — Victor  (d.  200  ?),    Works.  lb.,  xviii.,  388- 

434- 
5. — Tertullian   (d.   230  ?),  Works.    lb.,  1.,  408; 

ii.,  25 ;  iii.,  118;  xi.,  53-140;  xviii.;  Am.  ed., 

iii.-iv. 
6. — Origen  (d.  254  ?),  Works.     lb.,  ii.,  1-3;   x. ; 

Am.  ed.,  iv. 
7. — Cyprian  (d.  258  ?),  Works.     lb.,  viii;  xiii., 

1-264;  Am.  ed.,  v. 
8. — Dionysius  of  Alexandria  (d.  264  ?),  Works. 

lb.,  xx.,  157-265. 
9. — Tatian  (d.  166   ?),  Works.     lb.,  iii.,   1-46; 

Am.  ed.,  ii. 
10. — Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist,  in  Nic.  and  Post-Nic. 

Fathers.  1.     Other  translations. 

5. — Collections: 

1. — Apostolic  Constitutions.     Ante-Nic.    Christ. 
Lib.,  xvii.     Am,  ed.,  vii. 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       67 


2. — O'Leary,  L.  E.,  Apostol.  Const,  and  Cognate 

Documents,  N.  Y.,  1906. 
3. — Apostolical  Canons,  Tr.  by  R.  C.  Jenkins. 

Lond.,  1856.     See  Harnack,  Sources  of  the 

Apostolic  Canons.     Lond.,  1895. 
4. — Conybeare,  F.  C,    The  Apology  and  Acts  of 

Apollonius  and  other  Monuments  of  early 

Christianity.     N.  Y.,  1894. 
5. — Lardner,    N.     Jewish    and   Heathen    Testi- 
monials.    In  his  Works,  vii-ix. 

B.— SECONDARY: 

1. — special: 

1. — Allies,  T.  W.,  The  Formation  of  Christendom, 

4  vols.     Lond.,  1895. 
2. — Anderdon,  W.  H.,  Fasti  Apostolici.      Lond., 

1884. 
3. — Anson,  A.  J.  R.,  The  Church:  its  Organisation 

in  the  Time  of  the  Apostles.     Lond.,  1886. 
4. — Barnes,  A.,  Organisation    and   Government  of 

the  Apostolic  Church.     Phila.,  1854. 
5.— Bartlett,  J.  V.,  The  Apostolic  Age.       N.  Y., 

1900. 
6. — Baumgarten,   M.,    The  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

3  vols.     N.  Y.,  1854. 
7. — Capes,  J.  M.,    The  Church    of  the   Apostles. 

Lond.,  1886. 
8. — Catterille,    H.,    The  Genesis    of    the  Church. 

Edinb.,  1872. 
9. — Colman,    L.,    Ancient    Christianity.       Phila., 

l853- 
10. — Cox,  H.,    The  First  Century  of  Christianity. 

Lond.,  1892. 

11. — Cutts,  E.  L.,  Notes  of  Lessons  on  the  Church 
in  the  New  Testament.     N.  Y.,  1892. 

12. — Davidson,  S.,  The  Ecclesiastical  Polity  of  the 
New  Testament.     Lond.,  1855. 

13. — Dobschutz,  E.  von,  The  Early  Christian 
Communities.  N.  Y.,  1903.  Christian  Life 
in  the  Primitive  Church.     N.  Y.,  1904. 

14. — Dollinger,  J.  J.  I.,  The  First  Age  of  Christian- 
ity and  the  Church.     2  vols.     Lond.,  1877. 

15. — Fairbairn,  A.  M.,  Christianity  in  the  First 
Century.     Lond.,  1883. 


68       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


1 6. — Falconer,  J.   W.,  From    Apostle    to    Priest. 

Edinb.,  1900. 
17. — Farrar,  F.  W.,  The  Early  Days  of  Christianity . 

N.  Y.  1882. 
18. — Fisher,  G.  P.,  Beginnings  of  Christianity.     N. 

Y.,  1888. 
19. — Giles,  J.    A.,    Apostolical   Records   of  Early 

Christianity.     Lond.,  1886. 
20. — Harnack,  A.,   The  Expansion  of  Christianity 

in  the  First  Three  Centuries.     Lond.,   1904- 

1905.     2  vols. 
21. — Hatch,    E.,    Growth   of  Church   Institutions. 

Lond.,   1887.     Influence   of  Greek  Ideas  and 

Usages  upon  the  Church.     Lond.,  1890.     Or- 
ganisation of  the  Early  Churches .    Lond.,  1888. 
22. — Hausrath,    A.,     The   Time  of    the  Apostles. 

4  vols.     Lond.,  1895. 
23. — Hinds,   S.,  and  Newman,  J.  H.,  History  of 

the    Christian  Church   in    the  First  Century. 

Lond.,  1862. 
24. — Hort,  F.  J.  A.,  The  Christian  Ecclesia.    Lond., 

1897. 
25. — Jacob,  G.  A.,  Ecclesiastical  Polity  of  the  New 

Testament.     N.  Y.,  1874. 
26. — Janes,  L.  G.,  Study,  of  the  Primitive  Church. 

Bost.,  1886. 
27. — Lightfoot,  J.  B.,  Apostolic  Fathers.     N.  Y., 

1 89 1.     Dissertations    on    the    Apostolic    Age. 

N.   Y.,   1892. 
28. — Maurice,  J.  F.  D.,  Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical 

History.     Camb.,  1854. 
29. — McGiffert,  A.  C,  History  of  Christianity  in  the 

Apostolic  Age.     N.  Y.,  1891. 
30. — Merivale,  L.  A.,  Christian  Records.     Lond., 

l857- 
31. — Miller,    E.,    The  Priesthood  in   the  Light  of 

the  New  Testament.     Lond.,  1876. 
32. — Neander,   A.,   Planting  and  Training  of  the 

Christian   Church   by  the   Apostles.      N.    Y., 

1856. 
2,2) • — Orr,  J.,  Neglected  Factors  in  the  Study  of  the 

Progress  of  Christianity.      N.  Y.,  1899.      The 

Early  Church:  its  History  and  Literature.     N. 

Y.,  1901. 


The  Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age       69 


34. — Palmer,     R.,    The    Catholic    and    Apostolic 

Church.     Lond.,  1899. 
35. — Pressense,  E.  De,  Early  Days  of  Christianity. 

4  vols.     N.  Y.,  1873-8. 
36. — Pryce,  J.,  Notes  on  the  History  of  the  Early 

Church.     Lond.,  1892. 
37. — Ramsay,  W.  M.,    The  Church  in  the  Roman 

Empire.     N.  Y.,  1893. 
38. — Reichel,  C.  P.,   The  Origins  of  the  Church. 

Dub.,  1882. 
39. — Renan,  E.,  Origins  of  Christianity.     Lond., 

1888. 
40. — Ropes,  J.  H.,  The  Apostolic  Age  in  the  Light 

of  Modern  Criticism.     N.  Y.,  1906. 
41. — Row,  C.  A.,  Apostolical  Christianity.     Lond., 

1881. 
42. — Schaff,  P.,  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church. 

N.  Y.,  1874. 
43. — Simcox,  W.  H.,  The  Beginnings  of  the  Christ- 
ian Church.     Lond.,  1881. 
44. — Slater,  W.  F.,  Faith  and  Life  of  the  Early 

Church.     Lond.,  1892. 
45. — Stanley,  A.  P.,  Apostolic  Age.     Oxf.,  1874. 
46. — Tarrant,  W.  G.,  Beginnings   of  Christendom. 

Lond.,  1893. 
47. — Taylor,  I.,  Ancient  Christianity.    Lond.,  1844. 
48. — Thatcher,  O.  J.,   History  of  the  Apostolical 

Church.     N.  Y.,  1893. 
49. — Thiersch,  H.  W.  J.,    History  of  the  Christian 

Church  in  the  Apostolic  Age.     Lond.,  1852. 
50. — Vaughan,    C.    S.,    The   Church   of  the   First 

Days.     3  vols.     Lond.,  1864. 
5 1 . — Vedder,  H.  C,  Dawn  of  Christianity.     Phila., 

1894. 
52. — Watson,  R.  A.,  Apostolic  Age.     Lond.,  1894. 
53. — Weizsacker,  C,  The  Apostolic  Age.     2  vols. 

N.  Y.,  1894.     Antiqua  Mater.       Lond.,  1887. 
54. — Wernle,  P.,  The  Beginnings  of  Christianity. 

N.  Y.,  1902. 
II. — general: 

Alzog,  i.,  117-160.  Backhouse,  pt.  i.,  ch.  1,  2. 
Baur,  ii.,  16-61.  Blunt,  i.,  ch.  2-5.  Bouzique, 
i.,  ch.  1,  2.  Bright,  W.,  ch.  1.  Burton,  ch.  8. 
Butler,  ch.  2,  4,  5.    Chantrel,  ch.  1,  2.    Cheetham, 


70      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


ch.  2,  4,  7,  8.  Coxe,  ch.  2.  Crooks,  ch.  3,  10,  18. 
Cunningham,  lect.  1,  2.  Dehorbe,  ch.  28-32. 
Dollinger,  J.  J.  I.,  i.,  ch.  1,  sec.  4,  5;  ch.  3, 
sec.  1-4.  Duff,  79,  105,  108,  no,  120,  139,  157, 
226,  260,  304,  396.  Fisher,  pd.  i.,  ch.  2;  pd.  ii., 
ch.  1,  2.  Fitzgerald,  i.,  63-75,  1 18-129.  Foulkes, 
ch.  1,  2.  Gieseler,  sec.  25-30.  Gilmartin,  i., 
ch.  4.  Guericke,  106-139.  Hase,  24-41.  Hore, 
ch.  1,  2.  Hurst,  i.,  61-149.  Jackson,  ch.  3,  10. 
Jennings,  i.,  ch.  1,  2.  Killen,  sec.  3,  ch.  3. 
Kurtz,  i.,  22-36,  52-64.  Mahan,  bk.  i.,  ch.  n; 
bk.  ii.,  ch.  48.  Milman,  bk.  i.,  ch.  1.  Moeller, 
i.,  62-68.  Neander,  i.,  sec.  2,  3.  Newman,  A.  H., 
pd.  i.,  ch.  1-3.  Robertson,  bk.  i.,  ch.  8.  Schaff, 
i.,  187-217;  432-506.     Sikes,  ch.  2. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  ROMAN  CHURCH  AND  PETER'S  PRIMACY 

Outline:  I. — Planting  of  the  church  in  Rome  and  its  organisa- 
tion there.  II. — The  two  opposing  views  of  the  Petrine  theory. 
III. — Proofs  advanced  for  the  Petrine  theory.  IV. — Evidence 
given  against  the  Petrine  theory.  V. — Historical  conclusions. 
VI. — Sources. 

REPORTS  concerning  the  teachings  and  labours  of 
Jesus  must  have  early  reached  Rome.1  A 
perpetual  stream  of  strangers  and  provincials 
flowed  into  Rome  from  every  quarter  of  the  Empire, 
hence  every  new  creed,  theory,  and  organisation  was 
soon  known  in  the  capital. 2  Roman  merchants,  sail- 
ors, soldiers,  or  public  officials,  or  the  Jews,  or  the 
Greeks,  might  have  carried  news  of  the  new  sect  to 
the  heart  of  imperial  power.  Tertullian  mentions  the 
legend  that  Emperor  Tiberius  sought  to  include  Jesus 
among  the  Roman  gods,  but  his  plan  was  frustrated 
by  the  Roman  Senates  Eusebius  declared  that  this 
same  ruler,  "being  obviously  pleased  with  the  doc- 
trine," threatened  "death  to  the  accusers  of  the  Christ- 
ians."4 It  seems  reasonable  to  conclude,  then,  that 
Christianity,  soon  after  its  birth,  was  introduced  into 
the  Eternal  City. 

1  Moeller,  i.,  67,  75;  cf.  Acts  xviii.,  1-3. 

2  Gibbon,  i.,  579. 

3  Apol.,  5;  Suetonius,  Life  of  Claudius,  25. 
*  Euseb.,   ii.,   c.    2. 

7i 


72      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


It  appears  clear,  too,  that  Christian  converts  were 
early  won  in  Rome,  or  else  migrated  thither  from  other 
parts  of  the  Empire.  It  is  not  at  all  improbable  that 
many  of  these  early  Christians  in  the  capital  were 
Jews.  *  Paul  said  that  upon  his  arrival  in  Italy  he 
"found  brethren"  at  Puteoli  and  that  a  week  later 
Christians  came  out  of  the  city  of  Rome  to  greet  him. 2 
It  is  also  quite  probable  that  these  various  Christian 
communities  in  Italy  had  already  created  loose  local 
organisations.  Paul,  during  his  prolonged  stay  in 
Rome,  undoubtedly  converted  many  to  the  new  faith 
and  laboured  to  perfect  their  Church  organisation.  3 
The  magnificent  work  done  by  this  Apostle  in  promul- 
gating the  new  faith  throughout  western  Europe  was 
sealed  by  a  martyr's  death  at  Rome.-* 

It  appears,  also,  that  the  Apostle  Peter  laboured  at 
Rome,  probably  after  Paul,  and  completed  the  organi- 
sation of  the  Church.  Tradition  likewise  gives  him 
a  martyr's  crown.  The  Roman  Church,  therefore, 
founded  by  two  Apostles  and  nourished  by  their  heroic 
blood,  was  a  double  apostolic  seat.  This  unusual  ori- 
gin, coupled  with  the  fact  of  location  in  the  heart  of 
the  world,  together  with  a  hundred  other  causes,  made 
the  Roman  Church  very  conspicuous  from  the  first  and 
enabled  it  to  become  the  determining  factor  in  Western 
civilisation  for  fifteen  hundred  years.  Under  these 
circumstances  it  was  but  natural  that  the  head  of  the 
Roman  Church  should  come  to  have  superior  respect, 


i  Shortly  before  the  Christian  era  the  Jews  were  so  numerous 
that  8ooo  could  sign  a  petition  to  the  Emperor. — Josephus,  Antiq., 
xvii.,  c.  ii. 

2  Acts  xxviii.,  14-16;  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  ch.  15. 

3  Acts  xxviii.,  24,  30,  31. 
*  Euseb.,  ii.,  c.  22. 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy    73 

primacy  in  rank,  and  leadership  in  power,  first  in  Italy, 
and  then  throughout  western  Europe. 

The  mother  Church  in  Rome  was  imbued  with  great 
missionary  zeal,  and  spread  the  new  faith  with  extra- 
ordinary rapidity.  In  64  a.d.  the  Christians  in  Rome, 
according  to  the  heathen  historian  Tacitus,  constituted 
a  "huge  multitude."  l  By  250  the  Roman  bishop  ruled 
over  forty-six  presbyters,  seven  deacons,  seven  sub- 
deacons,  forty-two  acolytes,  and  fifty  readers,  exor- 
cists, and  porters. 2  The  Christians  in  Rome,  a  city  of  | 
possibly  one  million,  numbered  at  least  fifty  thousand  | 
as  estimated  by  Gibbons  and  possibly  three  times  that 
many  as  reckoned  by  later  investigators. *  Optatus, 
Bishop  of  Mileve  in  Numidia,  asserted  that  in  300  there 
were  forty  churches  in  the  Eternal  City.  While  possibly 
a  few  churches  may  have  been  planted  in  western 
Europe  independently,  just  as  in  Rome,  still,  in  general, 
Christianity  was  disseminated  throughout  western 
Europe  and  the  western  part  of  northern  Africa  through 
the  apostolic  organisation  in  the  capital  city.  Paul 
may  have  even  made  a  visit  to  Spain,  s  Bede  says 
that  King  Lucius  asked  the  Roman  bishop  in  156  to 
send  missionaries  to  Britain6  and  Tertullian  confirmed 
the  declaration. 7  In  France  a  church  was  planted  at 
Lyons  in  177  and  another  at  Vienne.8  In  the  third 
century,  asserts  Gregory  of  Tours,  seven  Roman  mis- 

1  Annals,  xv.,  44. 

2  Euseb.,  vi.,  c.  43. 

3  Gibbon,  i.,  ch.  15. 

*  Orr,  Neglected  Factors,  39. 

5  Rom.  xv.,  24;   Muratorian  Fragment;  Clement  of   Rome,    To 
Corinth,  c.  5;  Alzog,  i.,  125;  Kurtz,  i.,  44. 
6Eccl.  Hist.,  c.  4. 
1  Against  Jud.,   c.    7. 
8  Euseb.,  v.,  c.  1. 


74      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


sionaries  went  to  Gaul  and  there  became  seven  bishops 
with  subordinate  churches.  The  famous  St.  Denis  of 
Paris  was  one  of  these  pioneers. l  Christianity  was 
likewise  early  carried  into  Germany  (cis-Rhenana) 2 
and  across  the  Mediterranean  to  north-western  Africa.3 
It  is  a  matter  of  no  great  surprise,  therefore,  to  see 
the  Roman  Church  revered  as  the  great  mother  Church 
of  the  West.  Paul  speaks  of  the  faith  of  Rome  as 
"proclaimed  throughout  the  whole  world."4 

The  process  of  Church  organisation  at  Rome  was 
no  doubt  quite  similar  to  that  described  in  the  preceding 
chapter,  with  this  difference,  however,  that  the  epis- 
copal system  was  either  present  from  the  time  Peter 
and  Paul  appointed  a  successor,  or  at  least  began  very 
early.  Through  his  presbyters,  or  priests,  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  at  first  ruled  over  a  number  of  separate  com- 
munities in  the  city.  As  the  faithful  spread  the  gospel 
beyond  the  walls,  churches  were  organised  in  the  vil- 
lages and  jurisdiction  over  them  became  vested  in 
priests  sent  out  by  the  bishops.  In  time,  however,  the 
churches  in  the  chief  centres  of  population  demanded 
bishops  of  their  own;  they  were  appointed,  or  elected, 
under  influence  from  Rome,  and,  consequently,  acknow- 
ledged allegiance  to  the  Roman  See.  There  is  incon- 
trovertible evidence  that  by  the  fourth  century  every 
city  in  Italy  had  a  bishop .  The  village  bishops  naturally 
looked  to  the  city  bishops  for  assistance  and  advice.  The 
city  bishops  similarly  depended  upon  the  bishop  in  the 
capital  of  the  province,  and  the  provincial  bishop  in 

i  Annales  Francorum. 
2  Irenasus,  Against  Her.,  i.,  c.  io. 

^Tertullian,  Apol.,  c.  37;    Cyprian,  Ep.,  71,  73;  Augustine,  On 
Bap.,  ii.,  c.    13. 
*  Rom.  L,  8. 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy     75 


like  manner  recognised  the  superiority  of  the  bishop 
in  the  capital  of  the  Empire.  Thus  the  power  of  the 
Roman  bishop  was  gradually  extended  first  over  Italy 
and  then  over  western  Europe.  The  consciousness  of 
a  unity  of  belief,  unity  of  interest,  and  unity  of  pur- 
pose developed  comparatively  early  among  the  churches. 
A  name  for  this  unity  is  first  found  in  Ignatius  and  was 
the  Universal  or  Catholic  Church. 1  Before  long  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  was  to  claim,  by  divine  appointment 
and  arrangement,  sovereign  jurisdiction  over  the  great 
organisation. 

The  classes  won  to  the  new  faith  in  the  city  of  Rome 
through  the  zeal  of  the  Roman  Christians  included 
representatives  from  the  slave  to  the  imperial  family. 
The  earliest  converts  may  have  been  the  Jews,  who. 
were  quite  numerous  in  the  Eternal  City,  and  who 
best  understood  the  significance  of  Christianity.  The 
hope  and  faith  and  love  of  the  new  teaching  appealed 
powerfully  to  the  lowest  social  classes — the  wretched 
slave  and  the  impoverished  freedman. 2  The  need 
and  the  truth  of  this  lofty,  universal  creed  also  won 
adherents  from  the  great  creative  middle  class — includ- 
ing not  only  the  educated  but  also  the  soldiers,  trades- 
people, farmers,  imperial  officials,  and  skilled  workmen. 
In  fact  the  marvellous  vitality  and  the  unparalleled 
growth  of  Christianity  in  Rome  can  be  explained  satis- 
factorily only  upon  the  supposition  that  the  representa- 
tion of  this  class  was  very  great.3     From  the  nobility 

>  The  pagan  writer  Celsus  was  familiar  with  this  idea  as  early 
as   161   A.D. 

2  But  nothing  could  be  farther  from  the  truth  than  Gibbon's 
statement  that  the  Christians  were  won  "almost  entirely"  from 
the  "dregs  of  the  populace."     See  Orr,  Neglected  Factors. 

3  Ramsay  in  his  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  57,  goes  so  far  as 
to  say  that  the  new  faith  "spread  at  first  among  the  educated  more 


76      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


converts  were  likewise  secured  and  even  in  the  Em- 
peror's household  followers  were  found. *  In  short, 
the  whole  social  and  moral  structure  of  Rome  was 
leavened  by  the  new  ideas. 

Along  with  this  unparalleled  growth  of  the  power  of 
the  Roman  bishop  was  created  the  Petrine  theory 
destined  to  have  a  powerful  effect  on  the  history  of  the 
Church.  Since  an  inquiry  into  this  theory  has  a  pe- 
culiar significance  for  the  Roman  Catholic,  the  Greek 
Catholic,  and  the  Protestant,  it  is  necessary  to  consider 
the  subject  rather  carefully  from  the  standpoint  of 
both  its  advocates  and  opponents. 

The  Roman  Catholic  belief  is  that  Jesus  came  to 
organise  His  Church  on  earth ;  that  He  appointed  Peter 
to  be  his  successor  and  head  of  the  Church;  that  Peter 
went  to  Rome,  established  the  Church  there  in  the 
great  capital  city,  laboured  as  its  head  twenty-five 
years,  and  died  there  as  a  martyr;  that  Peter  trans- 
mitted his  leadership  and  primacy  to  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  whom  he  appointed  as  his  successor,  and  who  in 
turn  transferred  it  to  succeeding  popes ;  that  the  Roman 
Church,  therefore,  is  the  only  true  Church,  and  that 
these  contentions  are  conclusively  proved  from  the 
Bible,  the  Church  Fathers,  traditions,  and  monuments. 2 

The  Greek  Catholic  view  coincides  with  Rome 
in    asserting    the    divine    origin    of    the    Church.     A 

rapidly  than  among  the  uneducated.  "  This  statement,  however,  is 
probably  an  exaggeration.  See  an  excellent  discussion  in  Orr, 
Neglected  Factors,  95-163;  Merivale,  The  Romans  tinder  the  Empire, 
ch.  54. 

'  Phil,  iv.,  22;  Lightfoot,  Philippians,  171  ff.;  Howson,  St.  Paul, 
ch.  26;  Weizacker,  Apost.  Age,  ii.,  132;  Harnack,  Princeton  Rev., 
1878,  p.  257;  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  iii.,  c.  18. 

2  Alzog,  i.,  §§  48,  52,  53;  Berington  and  Kirk,  ii.,  1-113;  Gib- 
bons, Faith  of  Our  Fathers;  Cath.  Encvc. 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy    77 


certain  honourable  primacy  is  conceded  to  the  Apostle 
Peter;  and  to  his  successors  at  Rome,  as  patriarchs 
of  the  West,  is  granted  a  kind  of  supreme  leadership 
in  the  Church.  But  the  patriarchs  of  the  East  are 
put  on  an  equality  with  the  Pope  of  Rome,  and  thus 
the  extreme  claims  of  the  Petrine  theory  are  denied. 

Protestant  opinion  on  the  other  hand  takes  two 
forms : 

1.  The  pro- Petrine  view,  held  chiefly  by  the  Epis- 
copalians, maintains  that  Jesus  turned  His  Church 
over  to  all  His  Apostles;  that  upon  their  death  they 
transmitted  their  leadership  to  succeeding  bishops; 
that  Peter  was  in  Rome  and,  with  Paul,  helped  to 
organise  the  Church  there,  and  appointed  a  successor 
through  whom  apostolic  power  has  been  transmitted 
to  all  bishops  appointed  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  or  by 
his  appointees,  where  it  now  resides;  that  bishops  and 
their  successors  appointed  by  Apostles  other  than  Peter 
have  just  as  much  power  as  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  be- 
cause the  fruits  of  Peter's  work  are  merely  the  most 
marked,  but  not  necessarily  the  only  divine  or  the 
most  divine;  that  adequate  proofs  of  this  position 
are  found  in  history,  the  Church  Fathers,  and  the 
Scriptures. 

2.  The  anti-Petrine  view,  taken  by  most  Pro- 
testants, asserts  that  Jesus  left  no  Church  organisa- 
tion; that  he  did  not  appoint  Peter  as  his  successor; 
that  whatever  leadership  Peter  had,  came  from  his 
temperament  and  natural  ability;  that  there  is  no 
positive  proof  of  Peter's  being  in  Rome,  consequently 
he  could  not  have  founded  the  Church  there  and 
named  a  successor;  that  therefore  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  is  not  the  only  true  Church,  and  that  abundant 
proof  of  this  position  can  be  supplied. 


78       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


It  may  be  well  now  to  examine  the  proof  offered  in 
support  of  the  Petrine  theory  under  the  four  following 
heads : 

i.  Peters  primacy.  Jesus  said  to  Peter,  "Thou 
art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church; .  .  . 
And  I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven :  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth  shall 
be  bound  in  heaven;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose 
on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  1  No  such  words 
were  addressed  to  any  other  Apostle,  hence  Peter  is 
the  foundation-stone  of  the  Church.  Just  as  God 
changed  Abram's  name  to  Abraham,  when  he  called 
him  to  be  the  father  of  a  mighty  nation,  so  Jesus  gave 
Peter  a  new  name.2  Peter  was  chosen  to  be  present 
with  James  and  John  on  important  occasions,  like  the 
healing  of  the  daughter  of  Jairus3 ;  the  glorification  of 
Jesus4;  the  struggle  in  Gethsemanes ;  and  on  all  these 
occasions  Peter  is  named  first  in  the  record.  He  like- 
wise was  the  first  to  whom  the  risen  Christ  appeared. 6 
Before  His  ascension  Jesus  gave  Peter  charge  over  His 
whole  fold — laity,  priests,  and  bishops, — when  He  com- 
manded, "Feed  my  sheep,"  and  twice  repeated,  "Feed 
my  lambs."  7  These  facts  are  sufficient,  it  is  believed, 
to  warrant  the  belief  that  Jesus  appointed  Peter  to 
be  the  head  of  His  Church. 

1  Matt,  xvi.,  1 8,  19.  In  Syro-Chaldaic,  the  tongue  probably  used 
by  Jesus,  "Peter"  means  "rock"  or  "cephas.  "  The  only  parallel 
in  modern  languages  is  in  French:  " Tu  es  Pierre,  et  sur  cette 
pierre, "  etc.     Cf.  John  i.,  42. 

1  John  i.,  42. 

3  Mark  v.,  37;  Luke  viii.,  51. 

*  Matt,  xvii.,  1;  Mark  ix.,  2;  Luke  ix.,  28. 

5  Matt,  xxvi.,  37;  Mark  xiv.,  33. 

6  Luke  xxiv.,  12,  34;  cf.  John  xx.,  2-10;  Weizacker,  i.,  §  3. 

7  Luke  xxii.,  31-32;  John  xxi.,  15-18. 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy     79 


2.  Peter  s  exercise  of  his  primacy.  Next  to  Jesus, 
he  stands  head  and  shoulders  above  all  the  other  Apos- 
tles in  his  activity.  The  first  twelve  chapters  of  Acts 
are  devoted  to  him.  His  name  always  comes  first 
in  the  lists  of  Apostles,  and  Judas  Iscariot's  last. *  He 
performed  the  first  recorded  miracle, 2  and  was  the 
first  to  address  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem,  while  the  other 
Apostles  stood  around  to  see  three  thousand  converted.  3 
He  was  first  to  win  converts  from  both  the  Jews  4  and 
from  the  Gentiles, — Cornelius  and  his  friends.  5  He 
was  the  first  to  inflict  ecclesiastical  punishment  on 
offenders. 6  He  fought  the  first  heretic  in  the  Christ- 
ian Church. 7  He  made  the  earliest  apostolic  visi- 
tation of  the  churches.8  When  a  successor  to  Judas 
was  chosen,  Peter  alone  spoke,  and  the  other  Apostles 
silently  acted  on  his  advice.9  In  the  council  of  Jeru- 
salem Peter  first  spoke,  when  the  disputes  ceased  and 
' '  all  the  multitude  kept  silence  " ;  even  James  obeyed. 10 
James  was  beheaded  by  Herod,  but  no  tumult 
resulted.  Peter  was  imprisoned  about  the  same 
time,  and  the  whole  Church  was  aroused  about  it.11 
St.  Paul  himself  plainly  admitted  Peter's  pre-em- 
inence.12 These  deeds  clearly  indicate,  it  is  con- 
tended, that  Peter  consciously  exercised  the  primacy 
bestowed  upon  him,  and  that  his  fellow  Apostles 
recognised  it. 

3.     Peters    visit    to    Rome,    and    martyrdom    there. 
Peter's    First    Epistle,    addressed    from    "Babylon," 

1  Matt,  x.,  2-4;  Mark  iii.,  16-19;  Luke  vi.,  14-16;  Acts  i.,  13. 

2  Acts  iii.,  1-12.  3  Acts  ii.,   14-41. 
4  Acts  ii.,  41.  5  Acts  x. 

6  Acts  v.,  iff.  'Acts  viii.,   21. 

*Acts  ix.,  32.  9  Acts  i.,  13-26. 

'o  Acts  xv.,  6-12.  '  >  Acts  xii. 

1  2  Gal.  i.,  18;  ii.,  n. 


8o       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


naturally  interpreted,  proves  that  he  wrote  it  in  Rome. l 
Clement  of  Rome  (96  a.d.)  said,  "Let  us  set  before  our 
eyes  the  good  Apostles, — Peter,  who  endured  many 
labours,  and  having  borne  his  witness,  went  to  the 
appointed  place  of  glory,"  etc.2  Ignatius  of  Antioch 
(115),  in  a  letter  to  the  Romans,  mentions  Peter  as 
having  exhorted  them.  Papias  (130)  interpreted  1 
Peter  v.,  13  to  mean  Rome. 3  Dionysius,  Bishop  of 
Corinth  (170),  wrote  Soter,  Bishop  of  Rome,  about  the 
common  activity  of  Peter  and  Paul  in  Italy. 4  Irenaeus 
(190)  wrote,  "Matthew  .  .  .  published  his  Gospel 
while  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  at  Rome,  and 
founding  the  Church  there." s  Clement  of  Alexandria 
(200)  said  that  Peter,  "the  elect,  the  chosen  one,  the 
first  of  the  disciples,"  preached  at  Rome.6  Tertullian 
(200)  positively  asserted  Peter's  presence  in  Rome, 
and  is  the  first  to  describe  the  manner  of  his  death, 
in  Nero's  reign.7  Origen  (250)  declared  that  Peter 
was  the  great  foundation  of  the  Church,  and  that  "at 
last,  having  arrived  in  Rome,  he  was  crucified,  head 
downward,  having  himself  requested  that  he  might  so 
suffer."8  Commodion  (250)  named  Peter  and  Paul 
as  Neroian  martyrs;  and  Caius,  a  Roman  presbyter 
(250),  makes  a  like  assertion.9  Cyprian  (d.  258)  was 
the  first  to  call  Rome  the  locum  Petri,  while  Hippolytus 

1  1  Peter  v.,  13.     St.  John  everywhere  in  his  Apocalypse  calls 
Rome  Babylon:  xiv.,  8;  xvii.,  18. 

2  1  Ep.  to  Corinth,  Sec.  5. 

3  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  ii.,  c.  15;  iii.,  c.  39. 
*  lb.,  ii.,  c.  25. 

„    s  Against  Heresy,  iii.,  3,  No.  2. 

6  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  vi.,  c.  14. 

7  De  PrcBsc.  Hceret.  c.  36. 

8Cf.  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  iii.,  c.  1. 
fl-Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  ii.,  c.  25. 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy    81 


recorded  Peter's  conflict  with  Simon  Magnus  at  Rome. l 
The  Muratorian  Canon  referred  to  the  "passion  of 
Peter"  in  close  connection  with  Paul's  journey  to 
Rome.2  Peter  of  Alexandria  (306)  believed  Peter  was 
crucified  there,  and  Lactantius  accepted  it  as  un- 
doubted.* "The  Doctrine  of  Addai"  (fourth  century) 
of  the  Syriac  Church  mentioned  the  "Epistles  of  Paul 
which  Simon  Peter  sent  us  from  the  City  of  Rome."4 
Eusebius,  using  all  previous  testimony,  made  the  most 
complete  and  convincing  statement,  which  caps  the 
climax  of  the  overwhelming  proofs  The  "Deposito 
Martyrum"  gave  the  report  of  the  removal  of  the  two 
Apostles'  bodies  in  258  to  the  catacombs.  Jerome 
(d.  420)  added  the  information  that  Peter  laboured 
twenty-five  years  in  Rome  before  his  martyrdom.6 

4.  Peter  as  the  first  Pope  in  Rome.  With  the 
establishment  of  Peter's  primacy  and  his  presence  in 
Rome,  it  is  certainly  warrantable  to  conclude  that  he 
perfected  the  organisation  of  the  Church  there  and 
served  as  its  head  until  his  death,  when  he  appointed 
a  successor.  Clement  (96)  and  Ignatius  (115),  Diony- 
sius  (170)  and  Irenaeus  (190),  Commodion  (250)  and 
Lactantius  (d.  330),  all  in  speaking  of  Peter  and  Paul 
as  founders  of  the  Roman  Church,  always  name  Peter 
first.  Ignatius  spoke  of  the  "presidency"  of  the 
Roman  Church  under  Peter,  and  Tertullian  (b.  160) 
asserted  that  Jesus  gave  the  keys  to  Peter,  the  "Bishop 

•  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  ii.,  c.  13,  14. 

2  James,  Apocr.  Anecdota,  ii.,  p.  x. 

3  Inst.  Div.,  iv.,  21. 

4  Cureton,  Ancient  Syriac  Docs.,  33. 

s  Eccl.  Hist.,  ii.,  c.  14,  15,  17,  25;  iii.,  21,  31;  v.,  6. 

6  For  passages  from  later  writers  consult  Lipsius,  236,  Ramsay, 
Harnack,   Farrar,   Lightfoot,   McGiffert,   Schaff,   Renan,  Neander, 
Lea,   Kurtz,  Hase,  Moeller,  etc. 
6 


82      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


of  Bishops"  at  Rome,  and  through  him  to  the  Church. 
Origen  (d.  254)  called  Peter  "the  Prince  of  the  Apos- 
tles" and  "the  great  foundation  of  the  Church."  All 
the  earliest  lists  of  Popes  began  with  Peter  and  indi- 
cate the  transmission  of  his  power. 1  Cyprian  (d.  258) 
gave  the  complete  statement  of  the  primacy  of  the 
Roman  bishop  and  the  unity  of  the  Church  through 
Peter  and  Jesus. 2 

This  sums  up,  essentially,  all  the  proofs  offered  in 
support  of  the  Petrine  theory,  and  constitutes,  it  must 
be  confessed,  a  powerful  and  consistent  case. 

It  is  necessary  now,  in  the  next  place,  to  look  at  the 
evidence  offered  in  opposition  to  the  Petrine  theory. 
For  the  sake  of  clearness,  this  evidence  will  be  given 
under  the  four  heads  just  employed: 

1.  Peter's  primacy.  The  famous  passage,  "Thou 
art  Peter,"  etc.,  correctly  interpreted,  does  not  warrant 
a  belief  in  Peter's  primacy.  "Peter"  may  mean 
"rock"  ("cephas"),  but  it  here  refers  to  Christ,  not 
Peter,  or  to  Peter's  confession,  just  made,3  or  to  Peter's 
faith,  or  to  Peter  merely  as  a  type  of  all  the  Apostles.  * 
Furthermore  the  commission  to  "bind"  and  to  "loose" 

1  Hegesippus  made  a  list  of  bishops  in  Rome  in  the  time  of 
Anicetus  (155-168)  but  it  is  now  lost  (Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  iv., 
c.  22).  Eusebius  used  that  list,  and  also  gave  two  lists  of  his 
own  in  Greek  with  Peter  as  the  first  {Chronic on,  ii. ;  Eccl.; 
Hist.,  v.,  c.  6).  The  first  Latin  list  is  the  Catalogus  Liberianus 
(352?),  based  upon  earlier  lists.  St.  Augustine  (Ep.  53)  and 
Optatus  (Donatist  Schism,  ii.,  3)  both  give  Latin  lists.  These 
lists  show  how  early  the  whole  Church  recognised  the  importance 
of  the  succession  of  Roman  bishops.  The  list  made  out  by  Iren- 
asus  in  the  time  of  Bishop  Eleutherus  (174-189)  gives  Peter  and 
Paul  as  the  joint  founders  of  the  Church. 

^Epistles  43,  5'.  55;  59,  7  and  HI  71.  3!  73-  7'-  75.  *T,  Ante-Nic. 
Fathers,  v.,  263-596;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,   ch.   4. 

a  Matt,  xvi.,  16. 

4  Lightfoot,  Clement,  ii.,  481-490;  Hort,  Ecclesia,  16. 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy    83 


and  the  promise  connected  with  it  were  not  intended 
exclusively  for  Peter  but  for  all  the  Apostles 1 ;  Peter 
stood  only  for  a  type.2  The  change  of  Peter's  name 
does  not  carry  with  it  any  special  significance.  Peter 
himself  never  mentioned  his  primacy  in  his  speeches 
or  writings, 3  and  nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament  is 
it  distinctly  stated  or  recognised  by  others.  Whatever 
natural  capacity  for  leadership  Peter  may  have  pos- 
sessed, it  cannot  be  proved  that  he  received  an  official 
primacy.  Such  a  position  would  have  conflicted  like- 
wise with  the  supremacy  of  Jesus. 

2.  Peter's  exercise  of  his  primacy.  The  numerous 
instances  where  Peter  took  the  lead,  or  acted,  or  spoke 
first,*  or  where  his  name  heads  lists  of  Apostles, « 
merely  show  that  he  was  a  man  of  impulsive,  aggres- 
sive character,  who  would  and  did  naturally  take  the 
lead  in  powers  common  to  all  the  Apostles.  At  the 
council  of  Jerusalem  Peter  did  not  preside,  as  he  would 
have  done  if  he  was  the  recognised  "Prince  of  the 
Apostles,"  but  only  made  the  first  speech.6  Paul 
would  not  have  rebuked  Peter  to  his  face  about  some 
very  important  points  had  Peter  been  the  recognised 
head  of  the  Church. 7  Peter  was  a  coward,  braggart, 
and  traitor,  and  was  reproved  again  and  again  by  Jesus 
Himself, 8  who  would  not  have  chosen  such  a  person  to 
be  the  head  of  the  Church.     There  is  not   a   single 

1  Matt,  xviii.,  18. 

2  John  xxi.,  15-18;  Luke  xxii.,  31,  32. 

3  Cf.  Acts;  1  Pet.  1-3;  2  Pet. 

*  Acts  i.,  13-26;  ii.,  14-41;  i"-,  1-12;  x. ;  xv.,  7-12,  etc. 

5  Matt.  x. ,  2 ;  xvii. ,  1 ;  xxvi.  ,37;  Mark  iii. ,  16;  v. ,  3  7  ;  ix. ,  2  ;  xiv., 
33;  Luke  vi.,  14;  viii.,  51;  ix.,  28;  Acts  i.,  13. 

6  Acts  xv.,  1— 11. 
'  Gal.  ii.,  11-14. 

»  Luke  xxii.,  31;  John  xiii.,  36-38;  Matt,  xvi.,  23,  etc. 


84       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


reference  in  the  New  Testament  to  show  that  Peter 
ever  attempted  to  exercise  a  primacy  over  his  com- 
panions.    He  called  himself  a  fellow  "elder."1 

3.  Peter's  presence  in  Rome.  There  is  not  a  syl- 
lable in  the  New  Testament  to  warrant  the  conclusion 
that  Peter  was  in  Rome .  Inference  alone  makes  ' '  Baby- 
lon"2 the  Eternal  City.  On  the  contrary,  there  are 
implications  in  the  Scriptures  that  he  was  not  in  Rome. 
Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans  greeted  all  his  friends, 
but  said  not  a  word  about  Peter.  This  would  clearly 
indicate  that  Peter  had  not  been  in  Rome  before  this 
Epistle  was  written,  nor  at  the  time  it  was  written. 
Again  in  letters  written  from  Rome,  Paul  is  strangely 
silent  about  Peter's  presence.  The  claim  rests  wholly 
upon  tradition,  therefore,  and  that  is  far  from  con- 
clusive. There  is  a  significant  silence  from  the  time 
of  2  Peter  until  that  of  Clement  (96).  Clement,  to 
be  sure,  mentions  Peter's  martyrdom;  but  it  is  only 
by  inference  that  the  place  is  Rome.  Not  until  well 
on  in  the  second  century  did  the  legend  about  Peter's 
connection  with  Rome  begin  to  circulate,  and  not  until 
the  third  century  did  Tertullian  assert  positively  that 
Peter  was  martyred  in  Rome  under  Nero.  After  that 
the  assertion  was  generally  accepted  over  the  Church 
as  a  truth.3 

4.  Peter  as  the  -first  Roman  Pope.  This,  of  course, 
is  precluded  by  the  want  of  adequate  evidence  of 
Peter's  presence  and  labours  in  Rome. 

The  evidence  adduced  here  ends  with  the  sweeping 
denial  of  every  claim  of  the  Petrine  theory. 

•  1  Pet.  v.,  1.     See  2  John  i.,  153  John  i.(  1. 

2  1  Pet.  v.,  13. 

3  Cf.  Lipsius  for  a  full  discussion  of  the  so-called  "Simonian 
theory." 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy    85 


Having  now  stated  the  two  sides  of  the  question 
there  still  remains  the  duty  of  making  the  historical 
summary  from  the  sources  available,  namely,  both  the 
canonical  and  apocryphal  books  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  the  traditional  evidence  in  the  Church  Fathers. 
The  New  Testament,  as  the  most  important  source  of 
information,  reveals  Peter's  birthplace,1  occupation,2 
marriage,  3  call  by  Jesus,  *  and  elevation  to  apostle- 
ship,  s  It  shows  the  conspicuous  leadership  of  Peter 
in  the  apostolic  college — indeed,  a  primacy  which 
Jesus  Himself  recognised, — yet  leaves  the  character 
of  that  primacy  and  the  power  to  transfer  it  to  a  suc- 
cessor open  to  question.  The  New  Testament  evidence 
does  not  give  any  clue  to  Peter's  movements  after  Paul's 
notice  of  him  in  Galatians  ii.  except  the  reference  in 
1  Peter,  which  naturally,  but  not  literally,  interpreted 
might  indicate  that  he  was  in  Rome  (Babylon).  It 
likewise  affords  very  scanty  grounds,  therefore,  for 
believing  that  Peter  first  established  the  Church  in 
Rome,  or  that  he  was  the  first  Bishop  of  Rome,  or  that 
he  conferred  his  power  upon  a  successor. 

Traditional  evidence,  on  the  contrary,  is  more  favour- 
able to  Peter's  presence  in  Rome.  No  one  can  possibly 
doubt  that  the  Petrine  theory  was  generally  believed  in 
western  Christendom  at  least  after  the  third  century. 
Prior  to  the  third  century,  there  are  many  streams  of 
testimony  which  converge  in  positive  support  of  at 
least  a  portion  of  the  Petrine  theory: 

1.     The  official  lists   and   records   of    the   Roman 

»  John  i.,  44- 

2  Matt,  iv.,  18;  Mark  i.,  16-20. 

3  Matt,  viii.,  14;  Mark  i.,  29-31;  Luke  iv.,  38. 

♦  Matt,  iv.,  18;  xix.,  27;  Mark  i.,  16;  John  i.,  35,  40,  51;  Luke 
v.;  xviii.,  28. 

s  Mark  iii.,  13-19;  Luke  vi.,  12-16. 


86       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Church,  some  of  which  must  rest  upon  earlier  sources, 
accept  the  whole  question  as  proved  and  recognised 
generally. 

2.  The  transference  of  Peter's  remains  to  a  new 
resting  place  in  258  shows  that  the  tradition  was  defi- 
nite and  unquestioned  early  in  the  third  century. 

3.  The  writings  of  Caius,  Origen,  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, and  Tertullian  indicate  that  the  theory  was 
accepted  in  Asia,  Alexandria,  Carthage,  and  Rome  at 
the  same  period. 

4.  A  passage  from  Irenaeus,  who  probably  used  the 
official  documents  in  Rome  and  who  may  have  known 
St.  John  and  his  companions,  carries  the  legend  back 
to  the  second  century. 

5.  The  testimony  of  Dionysius  of  Corinth  (d.  165), 
Papias,  and  Ignatius  (d.  114)  carries  the  belief  back 
through  the  second  to  the  first  century. 

6.  The  clear  testimony  of  Clement  of  Rome  makes 
a  connecting  link  at  the  close  of  the  first  century. 

Hence  when  the  various  pieces  of  evidence — the 
official  sources,  the  monumental  testimony,  and  the 
writings  of  the  early  Fathers, — which  are  independent 
and  consistent,  are  combined  they  form  a  solid  body 
of  proof,  which  is  practically  irresistible,  that  Peter 
was  in  Rome.  Likewise  the  absolute  absence  of  any 
rival  tradition  from  other  cities  adds  greatly  to  the 
probability. 

Peter's  presence  and  death  in  Rome  may  be  admitted 
as  an  established  fact.  If  in  Rome,  whether  one  year 
or  twenty-five  years,  Peter,  with  his  aggressive  nature, 
with  his  marked  ability  for  leadership,  and  with  his 
capacity  for  organisation,  must  have  had  a  great  deal 
to  do  with  the  establishment  of  the  Roman  Church, 
either  jointly  with  Paul,  or  independently  of  him.     Nor 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy    87 


does  it  seem  to  be  a  misuse  of  the  law  of  historical 
probabilities  to  assert  that  Peter,  either  with  Paul  or 
without  him,  appointed  a  bishop  for  the  Church  of 
Rome  and  transferred  to  that  bishop  his  apostolic 
authority.  From  these  facts,  based  almost  entirely 
upon  traditional  evidence,  coupled  with  the  peculiar 
primacy  conceded  to  Peter  in  the  New  Testament  by 
his  fellow  Apostles,  gradually  developed  the  Petrine 
theory  with  all  its  sweeping  claims. 

The  admission  of  the  belief  that  the  Petrine  theory 
is  founded  on  certain  established  facts,  and  not 
merely  on  fancies  and  myths,  does  not  carry  with  it 
the  recognition  of  all  the  assertions  which  form  a  part 
of  that  theory.  Peter's  unique  leadership  in  the  apos- 
tolic college,  his  activity  in  founding  the  Roman  Church, 
and  his  naming  of  a  successor,  who  in  time  became  the 
Pope,  may  all  be  granted  without  carrying  with  it  the 
necessity  of  accepting  the  assertion  that  Christ  chose 
Peter  to  be  the  head  of  a  definite,  divinely-planned 
Church  and  that  Peter,  conscious  of  that  great 
mission,  went  to  the  capital  of  the  Roman  Em- 
pire, and  there  organised  the  only  true  Church  on 
earth. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 
1. — christian: 

1. — New  Testament  (27  canonical  books). 

2. — New  Testament  Apocrypha  (see  Chap.  III). 

3. — Church  Fathers: 

1. — Clement  of  Rome.     Ante-Nic.  Christ.  Lib., 
i.,  ch.  5;  iii.,  ch.  12  ff.;  Am.  ed.,  ix. 
^-  2. — Ignatius.     lb.,  i.,  137  ff.,  449  ff. 
3. — Papias.     lb.,  i.,  441  ff. 

4. — Dionysius   of   Corinth   (d.   178?).      Euseb., 
ii.,  25. 


The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


5> — Clement  of  Alexandria  (d.  218  ?),  Miscel- 
lanies. Ante-Nic.  Christ.  Lib.,  iv.,  355; 
xii.,  326,  379,  451-  452-     Am-  e^-.  "• 

6. — Irenaeus.     lb.,  i.,  261;  Am.  ed.,i. 

7. — Tertullian.  lb.,  ii.,  408;  xv.,  25;  xviii.,  118; 
Am.  ed.,  iii.,  iv. 

8. — Origen.     lb.,  xxiii.,  1-3;  Am.  ed.,  iv. 

9. — Hippolytus.     lb.,  ix.,  130. 
10. — Peter  of  Alexandria  (d.  311).     76.,  xiv.,  305, 

11. — Caius    of    Rome    (210?).      Euseb.,    11.,    25; 
iii.,  28;  v.,  28;  vi.,  20.     Ante-Nic.  Fathers, 
v. 
11. — non-christian: 

1. — Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist.     Many  eds. 

2. — Socrates,    Eccl.    Hist.      Nic.     and    Post-Nic. 

Fathers,  ii.,  109. 
3. — Theodoret,  Letters.     No.  86.     lb.,  iii.,  282. 
4. — Josephus  and  Philo.     See  Chap.  IV. 
5. — Heathen  writers  like   Lucan,  Pliny,  Tacitus, 
Suetonius,  Celsus,  Porphyry,  and  Julian.    See 
Chaps.  III.  and  IV. 
B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Allies,  T.  W.,  St.  Peter:  His  Name  and  His 

Office.     Lond.,  1895. 
2. — Allmatt,    C.   F.   B.,    Cathedra  Petri.      Lond., 
1884.    Was  St.  Peter  Bishop  of  Rome  f     Lond., 
1887. 
3. — Barnes,     A.    S.,     St.     Peter     in    Rome    and 
His    Tomb    in    the     Vatican    Hill.     Lond., 
1900. 
4. — Berington  and  Kirk,  Faith  of  the  Catholics. 
3  vols.     N.  Y.,  1885. 
. — Birks,  H.  A.,  Studies  in  the  Life  and  Charac- 
ter of  St.  Peter.     Lond.,  1887. 
. — Bright,   W.,    The  Roman   See   in    the   Early 

Church.     Lond.,  1896. 
. — Brown,    J.    H.,    Peter    the  Apostle    never    in 

Rome.     Lond.,  1861. 
. — Bruce,  A.  B.,  Training  of  the  Twelve.     N.  Y., 

1871. 
. — Darby,  W.    A.,   St.   Peter  at  Rome.      Lond., 
1872. 


5 


The  Roman  Church  and  Peter's  Primacy    89 


10.— Ellendorf,     J.,    St.    Peter:     Was   He   ever   at 

Rome  and  a  Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Rome? 

Lond.,  1887. 
„  _Fouard,  C,  St.  Peter  and  the  First  Years  of 

Christianity.     N.  Y.,  1892. 
^.-—Gallagher,  M.,  Was  the  Apostle  Peter  ever  at 

Rome?     N.  Y.,  1894. 
t, Green,  S.  G.,  The  Apostle  Peter:  His  Life  and 

Letters.     Lond.,  1873. 
14.— Hatch,  E.,  "Peter,"  Encyc.  Brit. 
15> — Hodder,  E.,  Simon  Peter:  His  Life.     Lond., 

1893. 
!6  _Kenrick,  F.  P.,  The  Primacy  of  the  Apostolic 

See  Vindicated.     Phil.,  1855. 
I7. Lightfoot,  J.  B.,  St.  Peter  in  Rome.     Clement, 

ii.,  481.     Lond.,  1890. 
18. — Littledale,  R.  F.,  The  Petrine  Claims.     N.  Y.. 


19.— Livius,  T.,  St.  Peter,  Bishop  of  Rome.     Lond., 

1902. 
20.— Murphy,  J.  N.,  The  Chair  of  St.  Peter.     Lond., 


2I. Puller,  F.  W.,  The  Primitive  Saints  and  the 

See  of  Rome.     Lond.,  1900. 
22. Ramsay,  W.  M.,   The  Church  in  the  Roman 

Empire.     Lond.,  1893. 
23. Rivington,  L.,  The  Primitive  Church  and  the 

See  of  St.  Peter.     N.  Y.,  1894. 
24. Robins,  S.,  Against  the  Claims  of  the  Roman 

Church.     Lond.,  1853. 
2 5. —Robinson,  C.  S.,  Simon  Peter:   His  Life  and 

Times.     2  vols.     Lond.,  1890-5. 
26. Ryberg,    A.    V.,    Roman    Legends    about    the 

Apostles  Paul  and  Peter.     Lond.,  1898. 
27.— Simon,  T.  C,  The  Mission  and  Martyrdom  of 

St.  Peter.     Lond.,  1852. 
11. — general: 

Alzog,  i.,  1 1 7-133.  Backhouse,  76,  229.  Bart- 
lett,  297  ff.,  364  ff.  Blunt,  i.,  10,  24,  28,  43-  45- 
Bouzique,  i.,  ch.  1.  Brock,  ch.  2,  3.  Cheetham, 
ch.  2,  §  5;  ch.  4,  §  5-  Cox,  i.,  ch.  10,  11.  Darras, 
i.,  ch.  1-3.  Dollinger,  First  Age,  1.,  71-83;  u., 
115,  145;  Hist,  of  Ch.,  I,  ch.  3,  §  4.  Duff,  ch.  7. 
Farrar,  bk.  ii.,   ch.  5-1 1.      Fisher,   18,  20,  23,  26, 


90       The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


43,  57,  106.  Gibbon,  ch.  9,  10.  Gieseler,  i.,  §  27. 
Giles,  ch.  16.  Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  2,  pp.  28,  29. 
Greenwood,  i.,  ch.  1-3.  Hase,  30.  Hurst,  i., 
104-106,  325.  Jackson,  ch.  3,  11.  Jennings,  i., 
ch.  1.  Killen,  §  1,  ch.  10.  Kurtz,  i.,  45. 
Mahan,  bk.  i.,  ch.  8.  Milman,  i.,  ch.  1.  Milner, 
i.,  cent.  1,  ch.  12.  Moeller,  i.,  345.  Neander, 
Planting,  etc.,  i.,  bk.  iv.,  ch.  2;  Ch.  Hist.,  i.,  84, 
203,  211.  Pressense,  Early  Years  of  Christ,  10  ft\, 
64,  176.  Renan,  The  Apostles,  ch.  6.  Robertson, 
bk.  i.,  ch.  8,  p.  160.  SchafT,  Apost.  Age,  bk.  i., 
ch.  4;  Ch.  Hist.,  pd.  i.,  ch.  4.  Stanley,  Apost. 
Age,   1-5,  56-114.     Walpole,  ch.  1-3. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE   ROMAN  GOVERNMENT'S  TREATMENT  OF  THE 
CHRISTIANS 

Outline:  I. — Religious  persecutions  before  the  Christian  era. 
II. — Christians  first  persecuted  by  the  Jews.  III. — Causes  and 
motives  of  persecution  by  the  Roman  government.  IV. — Number 
and  general  character  of  the  persecutions.  V. — Results  of  per- 
secutions.    VI. — Sources. 


Rel: 


ELI  GIG  US  persecution  originated^  long  before 
the  Christian  era  began — in  fact  it  runs  through 
the  whole  history  of  religion.  In  Rome  all 
citizens  were  required  by  law  to  conform  to  the  Roman 
religion  so  that  the  gods  would  protect  the  state. 
Refusal  brought  punishment,  but  always  on  political 
grounds. l  Foreign  religions  which  were  either  harm- 
less or  helpful  were  often  adopted,  or  at  least  toler- 
ated.2 Those,  however,  which  were  dangerous  to 
public  morality,  social  order,  or  political  security, 
and  which  were  not  tolerant  of  other  religions,  were 
severely  treated  by  the  Roman  government.  This  was 
the  Roman  legal  principle  of  procedure  in  the  case  of 
every  such  religion,  3  hence  when  Christianity  appeared, 

»  Hardy,  1-18. 

2  Examples:  Cybele,  Bellona,  Magna  Mater. 

»  Examples:   Cult  of  Tgianfr eluded  from   Rome  S8  B.C.     (Ter- 
tullian,  A£oL).*Temples  of   Isis  and   Serapis   destroyed  so.gx^ 
(Dion  Cassius,  xi!T47).     Repeated  measures   later.    Jews  expelled  < 
from   Rome. 

91 


92      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


jjLome  had  already  developed  a  distinct  policy  which 
igrsfr  tolerated  and  then  persecuted  it. 

Persecution  came  to  the  Christians  first  from  the 
Tews.  Had  not  these  deserters  of  their  fathers'  faith 
precipitated  Roman  hatred  upon  the  Jews  which  re- 
sulted in  persecution,  expulsion,  and  loss  of  freedom 
and  independence  ? !  Might  not  the  Jewish  religion  be 
greatly  weakened  if  this  proselyting  continued  ?  Hence 
the  Christians  were  persecuted  individually  and  in 
masses.2  The  Jews  sought  in  every  possible  way  to 
incite  the  Roman  authorities  against  the  hated  Christ- 
ians. ^  This  resulted  in  an  irreparable  breach  between 
the  two  sects.  The  Christians  were  brought  into  greater 
prominence,  and  the  Romans  even  sought  to  protect 
them  from  the  Jewish  fanatics.4  At  the  same  time|  a 
greater  Christian  ze,a1  was  arouse^  and  tjius  ths^pread  | 
of  the  new  faith  was  promoted.  * 

The  Roman  government  tolerated  the  Christians 
at  the  outset,  because  they  were  regarded  as  a  harmless 
sect  of  Jews,  whose  work  was  quiet  and  unobtrusive.5 
The  significance  of  Christianity  was  not  understood, 
nor  the  marvellous  spread  of  the  faith  noticed.  In- 
deed Roman  hostility  to  the  Jews  led  at  first  to  per- 

1  Neander,  i.,  89;  Fisher,  30.  Caligula,  it  seems,  expelled  the 
Jews  from  Rome;  Claudius  (41-54)  first  forbade  their  assembling 
(Dion  Cassius,  60,  6)  and  then  sought  to  drive  them  out  of  the 
capital  (Orosius,  Hist.,  7,  6.) 

2  For  individuals  like  Stephen,  Acts  vii.,  58;  James,  Acts  xii., 
2;  Peter,  Acts  iv.;  xii.,  3;  Paul,  Acts  ix.,  23,  24;  xiv.,  5,  19;  xvii., 
13;  xxiii.,  12;  xvi.,  23;  xxii.,  24.  For  masses  see  Acts  viii.,  1-4; 
Acts  xxvi.,  10-12;  Clement,  Recognitions,  i.,  ch.  53,  71;  Justin 
Martyr,  1  Apol.,  ch.  36;  Dialogue  with  Trypho,  ch.  16,  39,  96,  115. 

3  Hurst,  i.,  153.  ^ 

4  Acts,  xviii.,  14,  15;  xxi.,  31,  32;  xxiv.,  1-27 ;  xxv.,  14;  xxvi.,  32 ; 
Uhlhorn,  238, 

'  Origen,  Against  Celsus,  iii.,  1-3.  '   0 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians      93 


sonal  and  official  protection  of  the  supporters  of  the 
new  faith,  until  the  Jewish  War  in  70  a.d. 

The  Roman  policy  soon  changed,  however,  from  that 
of  indifference,  or  protection,  to  persecution.  The 
causes  for  this  change  are:  (1)  The  political  science  of 
the  Roman  Empire,  and  (2)  the  inherent  character  of 
Christianity. 

E^LCjtJhL  the  Roman  state  ernhndipd  foe  highest 
mod,  hence  all  human  good  depended  upon  the  in^~ 
JTegrity  and'  security  of  the  state^  That  principle 
subordinated.'  the  religious  to  the  political,  and  made 
the  Emperor  the  head  of  all  recognised  religions. 
Roman  law  upheld  this  theory,  as  clearly  stated  by 
Cicero:  "No  man  shall  have  for  himself  particular 
gods  of  his  own;  no  man  shall  worship  by  himself  new 
or  foreign  gods,  unless  they  are  recognised  by  the 
public  laws." l  Julius  Paulus,  a  Roman  citizen, 
stated  the  idea  thus:  "Whoever  introduces  new  re- 
ligions, the  tendency  and  character  of  which  are  un- 
known, whereby  the  minds  of  men  might  be  disturbed, 
should,  if  belonging  to  the  higher  rank,  be  banished: 
i|  to  the  lower,  punished  with  death."  Gaius  said  of 
forbidden  associations:  "Neither  a  society,  nor  a 
.  college,  nor  any  body  of  this  kind,  is  conceded  to  all 
persons  promiscuously;  for  this  thing  is  regulated  b^ 
laws,  or  codes  of  the  Senate,  and  by  imperial  constitu- 
tions."2 Hence  from  a  legal  standpoint  Christianity 
was  illegal,  because  it  introduced  a  new  religion  not 
admitted  into  the  class  of  religiones  licit®.  "You  are 
not  permitted  by  the  law,"  was  the  taunt  of  pagans.3 

1  Concerning  Laws,  i.(  pt.  2,  ch.  8.  This  was  also  the  ancient 
principle  of  the  XII.  Tables. 

2  Bk.  iii.,  ch.  4,  par.  1. 

'  See  Tertullian   and  Celsus. 


94      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


To  organise  churches  and  to  hold  unlicensed  meetings 
were  violations  of  Roman  law.  Might  they  not  easily 
serve  as  covers  for  political  plots?  Maecenas  advised 
Augustus:  "Worship  the  gods  in  all  respects  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  laws  of  your  country,  and  compel 
all  others  to  do  the  same.  But  hate  and  punish  those* 
who  would  introduce  anything  whatever  alien  to  our" 
customs  in  this  particular  .  .  .  because  such  persons, 
jjy  introducing  new  divinities,  mislead  many  to  adopt 
foreign  laws.  Hence  conspiracies  and  secret  combina- 
tions— the  last  things  to  be  borne  in  a  monarchy."1"* 
Roman  citizens,  therefore,  who  turned  Christian  were 
criminals,  outlaws,  bandits,  and  traitors;  consequently 
the  best  Emperors,  those  who  felt  called  upon  to 
•  enforce  the  law  for  the  weal  of  the  Empire,  those 
who  wished  to  restore  the  vigour  and  power  of  old 
Rome,  sought  to  exterminate  them,  while  the  worst 
rulers  were  mostly  indifferent,  and  in  some  instances 
tolerant. 

Christianity,  inherently^  was  opposed  to  the  whole 
,  andrel 


governmental,  social,  and  religious  systems  of  Rome 
in  the  most  offensive  and  uncompromising  manner. 
It  advocated  one  God  for  all  men,  one  universal  king- 
dom, one  brotherhood  of  all  men,  and  oneplan  ffi^" 
^ilvation.  It  was  world-wide,  above  the  Emperor^ 
and  advocated  a  non-Roman  unity.  The  Christians 
were  subjects  of  God's  kingdom  first,  and  the  Em- 
peror's next;  and  when  Rome  spurned  this  secondary 
allegiance  they  ceased  to  feel  themselves  Romans  at 
all. 2  They  refused  the  duties  of  loyal  citizens,  held 
no  offices,  objected  to  military  service,3  and  refused 

1  Address  reported  by  Dion  Cassius. 

2  Ramsay,  356. 

3  Uhlhorn,  Conflict  of  Christ,  with  Heathenism,  231. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians     95 


to  sacrifice  to  the  honour  of  the  Emperor.1  "Does 
not  the  Emperor  punish  you  justly?"  asked  Celsus. 
"Should  all  do  like  you  he  would  be  left  alone — 
there  would  be  none  to  defend  him.  The  rudest 
barbarians  would  make  themselves  masters  of  the 
world. "  Eurthermore^  the  Chrjsftians  claimed  the 
exclusive  possessing  o|  <fovme  knnw1<ift1fyp  Qri^  '"flllfid 
all  forms  of_  pagan  worship  idolatrous. J2  Christ- 
ianity itself  was  intolerant  of  all  other  religions. 
Was  not  Christianity  the  only  true  faith?  How  then 
could  the  Christians  compromise  with  false,,  faitis,  or 
concede  to  them  any  truth,  or  any  right  to  exist  ? 3 
Hence  it  was  inevitable,  and  Christians  were  keenly 
conscious  of  the  fact,  that  a  conflict  should  arise 
between  Christianity  and  the  Roman  Empire,  before 
the  universal  dominion  of  the  world  could  come. 
The  efforts  of  imperial  officers  to  compromise  matters, 
Jpy  ^insisting  on  mere  outward  conformity,  jmel^  with 
little  success. 

Tjj^attack  made  by  paganism  on_  Christianity  camg 
first  from  Roman  philosophers,  scholars,  and  states- 
men for  all  sorts  of  motives.  Some  desired  popular^ 
favour,  others  were  sincere,  still  others  sought  +rwin. 
miperial  approval.  Many,  no  doubt,  even  though 
they  had  no  longer  any  heart  for  the  ancient  faith, 
yet  could  not  bear  to  see  it  abolished.  They  would 
agree  with  Csecilius  that  "Since  all  nations  agree  to 
recognise  the  immortal  gods,  although  their  nature 
or  their  origin  may  be  uncertain,  I  cannot  endure 
that  any  one  swelling  with  audacity  and  such  irrelig- 
ious knowledge  should  strive  to  dissolve  or  weaken  a 

1  Uhlhorn,  Conflict  of  Christ,  with  Heathenism,  234. 

2  Gibbon,  ii.,  bk.  3,  ch.   16. 

3  Uhlhorn,  224;  Moeller,  i.,  81. 


96      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 
y 

religion  so  old,  so  useful,  so  salutary. "  l  Tacitus  called 
Christians  "haters  of  mankind,"  and  assailed  their 
religion  as  a  "destructive  superstition."2  Suetonius 
denounced  the  new  faith  as  a  "poisonous  or  malignant 
superstition."  Others  scoffed  at  these  odd  devotees 
as  "dangerous  infidels,"  "enemies  of  Caesar  and  of 
the  Roman  people,"  and  "a  reprobate,  unlawful, 
desperate  faction."  Priests,  driven  on  by  duty  antt 
possibly  fearing  the  loss  of  their  offices,  added  their 
sacred  voices  to  the  popular  clamour.  3  ]\£erchants 
and  artists,  whose  livelihood  depended  upon  the  sale 
of  their  products  and  wares  to  pagan  temples  and 
worshippers,  raised  their  voices  against  the  new  sect 
"without  altars,  without  temples,  without  images, 
and  without  sacrifices."4  Then  the  popufcqg.  incited 
by  the  above-named  classes,  took  up  the  opposition 
and  soon  spread  the  wildest  reports,  s 

Christians  were  also  declared  to  be  responsiblefor 
every  disaster  like  war,  famine,  fire,  pestilence,  flood7 
earthquakes,  death  of  prominent  persons,  etc.  The 
gocfs,  angered  at  the  presence  of  such  persons,  sent 
these  dire  calamities6  on  the  atheists,  who  denied 
the  many  gods  and  worshipped  but  one,  and  who 
discarded  all  images — even  that  of  the  Emperor.17 
Did  they  not  adore  the  wood  of  a  cross  and  worship 


1  Octav.,   c.   8. 

2  Annales,  xv.,  c.  44. 

3  Alzog,  i.,  257. 

4  Acts  xix.,  24  ff. ;  Pliny,  Ep.,  x.,  97;  Neander,  i.,  92. 

5  For  a  detailed  statement  of  the  accusations  read  the  apologies 
of  Justin  Martyr,   Athenagoras,  Tertullian,   and  Origen. 

6  Cyprian,  To  Demetrianus ,  1;  Origen,  Against  Celsus,  in.,  ch.  16; 
Tertullian,  Apol.,  ch.  40;  To  Nations,  9;  Alzog,  i.,  261. 

'Justin  Martyr,  Apol.,  i.,  ch.  6,  13,  17;  Arnobius,  Against  Gentes, 
iii.,  ch.  28. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians      97 


the  head  of  an  ass? l     Did  they  not  refuse  to  conform 
to  all  religious  observances  and  festivals?     Who  but 
dangerous    conspirators    would    hold    their    meetings 
in   secret    at    night?     These    anarchists   who   refused 
all  civic  service 2 ;  these  social  revolutionists  who  broke 
up    family   ties,  3    set    slave  "against    master,    taught 
robbery  under  the  guise  of  equality,  refused  to  enjoy^ 
the"  social   games   and  festivals,  and   interfered   with 
business;  these  cannibals  who  ate  the  flesh  and  dranl^ 
the  blood  of  their  infants,  the  offspring;  of  their  inj. 
cesfrious  and  adulterous  carousals — what  punishment 
could  be  too  severe  for  such  degenerates^?     Were  they 
not  a  Tewish  sect  which  had  deserted  the  faith  of  their 
fathers,   and  wn"ich  could   command   respect   neither 
for  age  nor  legality?4 

The  occasion  for  the  inevitable  war  between  the 
Roman  sword  and  the  Christian  cross  was  popular 
hatred  and  ridicule,  and  the  frequent  outbreaks 
of  the  mobs,  f  he  fundamental  cause  was  political^ 
necessity,  for  the  Christians  were  guilty  of  crimen 
tcescB   majestatis,  high   treason.      Christianity   in   the 

1  A  crucifix  with  the  head  of  an  ass  and  body  of  a  man  was  actu- 
ally dug  up  in  Rome  and  is  now  exhibited  in  a  museum  there.  In 
Tertullian's  day  there  was  circulated  a  picture  of  a  man  with 
the  ears  of  an  ass,  clothed  in  a  toga,  holding  a  book,  and  with 
these  words  beneath:  "The  God  of  the  Christians"  (Apol,  16; 
Ad.  Nat.,  11,  14;  Tacitus,  Hist.,  v.,  3).  In  the  Palace  of  the  Cassars 
a  rough  sketch  of  a  crucified  man  with  an  ass's  head  was  found 
(Hist.  Photographs,  No.  107,  Oxf.,  1870;  Univ.  Quart.,  July,  1879, 

P-  338). 

2  Origin,  Against  Celsns,  viii.,  ch.  75;  Apol.,  ch.  29,  35,  and  39; 
^ertullian,  "Concerning  Idol,  ch.  17;  De  Cor.  Mil.,  i.,  c.  15. 

3  Cf.  Luke,  xxi.,  16. 

*  Hence  all  the  hatred  and  prejudice  of  the  Romans  for  the  Jews 
were  turned  against  the  Christians.    Gibbon,  ii.,  6;  Gieseler,  i.,  p. 
101. 
7 


98      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Roman  Empire  was  somewhat  like  anarchy  to-day 
in  the  United  States  in  its  relation  to  the  state.     The 

^technical  charges  made  against  the  Christians  were: 
(i)  introducing  a  religio  illicita^  for  which  the  penalty 
was  death  or  banishment;   (2)  committing  Icesa  majes- 

ttas,  for  which  the  penalty  was  loss  of  social  rank,  out- 
lawry, or  death  by  sword,  fire,  or  wild  beasts  ^(3) 
being  guilty  of  sacrtlepiuni,  for  which  the  penalty  was 
^eath  by  crucifixion,  the  ax,  or  wild  beastsj  (4)  prac- 
tising magic,  for  which  the  penalty  was  crucifixion,  or 
exposure  to  wild  beasts  in  the  circus. 
v  Both  the  number  and  character  of  the  persecutions 
seem  to  be  misunderstood.  The  Church  Fathers  an^ 
many  later  historians  magnify  the  number,  fierceness^ 
and  duration  of  the  persecutions,  and  the  number 
killed.1  On  the  contrary  it  seems  that  considerable 
time  elapsed  before  the  Christians  were  noticed  by  the 
government,  which  then  proceeded  against  them  with 
caution  and  reluctance  and  punished  them  in  com- 
parative moderation.2  The  Church  enjoyed  many- 
seasons  of  rest  and  peace.  The  number  of  Christians 
killed  during  the  entire  period  of  persecution  was 
comparatively  small.3  The  persecutions  varied  with 
the  whims  and  feelings  of  each  Emperor — the  best 
rulers  like  Trajan,  Marcus  Aurelius,  Decius,  and  Dio- 
cletian, feeling  the  necessity  of  upholding  the  law,  were 
Ip^c+JL^i'  the  most  energetic  persecutors,  while  the  worst  Em- 
.^c^Tcn.*  "  perors  were  indifferent,  or  even  favourable.  The 
early  persecutions  were  only  spasmodic  outbreaks 
and  limited;  the  later  ones  were  general.     Tfcere  is  no_ 

1  Origen  declared  that   the   number  of   Christian   martyrs   was 
small  and  easily  counted.    Celsum,  c.  3. 

2  Gibbon,  ii.,  ch.  16;  Uhlhorn,  234,  235. 

3  Moeller,  i.,   193. 


J» 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians      99 


reason  for  giving  ten  as  the  number  of  the  persecution^ 
— nor  for  comparing  them  with  the  ten   places  rf 

The  first  persecution  occurred  in  Rome  under  Nero 
in  6a  a.d.1  Some  historians  contend  that  the  Neron-^ 
ian  persecution  fell  upon  the  Jews,  whom  Tacitus, 
writing  fifty  years  after  the  event,  erroneously  calls 
Christians. 2  Others  maintain  that  the  Jews,  through 
court  influence,  shifted  the  punishment  from  them- 
selves to  the  Christians.  3  Recent  scholars,  however, 
are  inclined  to  accept  the  literal  narrative  of  Tacitus.  * 

According    to fog    wrgirm     of    the     situationT    the^ 

persecution  was  accidental — «,  device  of  Nero  to 
divert  the  suspicion  directed  against  himself  "of  hav-  ' 
mg  burned  pnTTA  —  gTl^  1nra]T  that  is,  it  did  not.^ 
extend  to  the  provinces.  A  few  Christians  were  tor- 
tured and  compelled  to  confess  themselves  guilty  of 
incendiarism  and  to  give  the  names  of  others,  and 
*that  led  to  the  punishment  of  an  "  ingens  multitudo  " 
as  Nero's  scapegoats,  s  As  a  punishment  for  their 
alleged  crime  of  incendiarism  and  "hatred  for  the 
human  race,"  they  were  covered  with  the  skins  of 
wild  beasts  and  torn  to  pieces  by  the  dogs  in  the 
circus,  crucified   by  day,  and   burned   as  torches   by 

>  Tacitus,  Ann.,  xv.,  44.  It  seems  to  be  very  probable  that 
persecutions  by  the  Roman  government  occurred  earlier  than  this. 
1  Pet.;  Rev.  ii.,  13;  xx.,  4. 

2  Schiller,  Lipsius,  and  Hausrath. 

'  Notably   Merivale. 

*  Hardy,  Uhlhorn,  Ramsay,  Allard,  and  Harnack. 

s  E.  Th.  Klette,  Nero  and  the  Christians,  who  relies  for  his  con- 
clusions on  sources  prior  to  Tacitus,  repudiates  the  scapegoat  theory. 
He  contends  that  Nero,  influenced  by  Jewish  intrigue,  publicly 
punished  the  Christians  as  Christians  and  because  of  the  popular 
suspicions  against  them,  so  as  to  make  it  appear  that  the  burning 
of  Rome  was  due  to  the  wrath  of  the  gods. 


ioo     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


njght.  J  Paul,  in  all  likelihood,  fel]..  a  victim  to.  thjs 
persecution  and  the  Roman  Church  has,  alwayshe^ 
lieved  that  Peter  also  perished  at  this  time^ 

^s  a^  result t  the  attention  of  the  Roman  govern- 
ment was  directed  tpm  these  '^haters  of^  the  hynjar^ 
race,,"  and  they  became  branded  as  outlaws  and 
brigands.  Popular  fury  ran  riot.  A  precedent  was 
established,  both  in  Rome  and  the  provinces,  for 
punishing  Christians  for  the  name  alone.3  Never- 
theless sympathy  was  won  for  them,  they  secretly 
increased  in  numbers,  and  were  compelled  to  adopt 
a  better  organisation  in  order  to  resist  oppres- 
sion. M)ove  everything  else  the_  striking  differ- 
ence  between  the   Kingdom   of  God  and  the  Empire. 

the 


strongly 


marked 


on 


Hq\   Caesar  was    s 

conscience. 

After  Nero's  persecution,  under  the  Flavian  Em- 
perors (68-96) ,  theije  |  was  a  standing  law  against 
Christianity^  like  that  against  brigandage,, but  it  was 
only  occasionally  enforced.4  There  "is  no  positive  prooT 
of  persecution  under  Vespasian  (69-79) .  Titus  (79-81) , 
however,  continued  the  policy  of  Nero.5  Under 
Domitian  (81-96)  there  was  increased  severity  in  both 
Rome  and  the  provinces.  This  may  have  been  oc- 
casioned in  part  by  the  fact  that  as  a  result  of  the 
Jewish  War  all  toleration  for  the  Jews  was  withdrawn. 
Christians,  were  now  classed  with  the  hated  Jews. 
Flavius  Clemens,  the  Emperor's  cousin,  was  executed 

•  Juvenal,  Sat.,i.,  155  ff. ;  Seneca,  Ep.,  14;  Clement,  To  Corinth,  6; 
Euseb.,  ii.,  c.  25;  Orosius,  vii.,  c.  7.  Cf.  Ramsay,  Ch.  in  Rom.  Etnp. 
226  ff. 

2  Sulp.  Severus,  Chron.  ii.,  c.  29;  Transl.  and  Ref.,  iv.,  6. 

3  Mommsen,   Sandy,   Hardy,   Ramsay. 

4  Mommsen,  v.,  523  n. 

s  Sulp.  Severus,  Chron.,  ii.,  c.  30,  6;  Transl.  and  Ref.,  iv.,  6-8. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians    101 


and  his  beautiful  wife  Domitilla  was  banished.1 
Many  others  were  killed,  compelled  to  fight  wild  beasts 
in  the  arena,  or  at  least  lost  their  property.2  It  was 
even  reported  that  Domitian  planned  to  have  all  the 
relatives  of  Jesus  slain  in  order  to  prevent  the  rise 
of  a  possible  rival  in  the  east.3 

Of  "the  Five  Good  Emperors"  (96-180)  who  suc- 
ceeded the  Flavian  rulers,  three  continued  the  policy  • 
of  persecution.     The  first,  Tfcrv^  J^fi-qS) ,  was  toler- 
ant ^o  the   Christian^.     The   next   Emperor,   Trajan 
(98-1 1 7) ,  one  of  the  best  Emperors,  was  not  a  wanton 
persecutor,  4  but  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  uphold  the 
laws  and  religion  of  the  Empire,  s      He  was  really  the 
first  Emperor  to  proceed  against  Christianity  frorn  a. 
purely  legal t  point  of  view...    By  this  time  Christianity  A 
was  clearly^  recognised  as  a  distinct  sect  and  its  real 
significance  appreciated.     His  policy  may  be  clearly 
seen  in  his  correspondence  with  Pliny,  the  governor 
of   Bithynia    (112).6     No  ^doubt   his   views   were   in- 
fluenced by  Tacitus  and  Pliny,  who  regarded  Christ- 
ianity   as    a    "bad    and    immoderate    superstition." 

Still  under  Trajan  persecution  was  limited  to  Bithynia* 

* 

»  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  iii.,  c.  18;  Dion  Cass.,  lxvii.,  c.  14;  Suet., 
Dom.,  c.   15;  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  6. 

2  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  iv.,  26. 

3  Hegesippus,  quoted  in  Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist.,  iii.,  c.  20;  Ter- 
tullian;  Clement  of  Rome,   ist  Epistle. 

*  Melito  of  Sardica  (c.  170),  Lactantius,  Eusebius,  and  the 
mediaeval  writers  generally  held  that  he  was  rather  favourable  to 
Christians. 

5  Gieseler,  Aube,  Overbeek,  Uhlhorn  Keim,  and  Renan  held 
that  Trajan  began  a  new  era  unfavourable  to  Christians  but  Light- 
foot,  Hardy,  and  Ramsay  explain  it  on  the  ground  of  political 
expediency. 

6  Pliny  wrote  sixty  letters  to  Trajan  and  Trajan  made  forty- 
eight  replies.  These  have  all  been  translated  into  English.  Read 
letters  96  and  97.     See  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  1,  p.  8. 


io2      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Jerusalem,    and   Antioch,    although    Christianity   had 
been   formally   proscribed   everywhere,  together  with 
all  secret  societies.     His  attitude  was  the  model  for 
persecutions  of  the  second  century  and  later. l 
y  Hadrian  (i  17-138),  who  apparently  judged  Christ- 
ianity  rather   trivially,    issued    the    famous    rescript 
/which  forbade  riotous  proceedings,  on  the  one  hand , 
and  malicious  informatipn_agajnst^iie_ChristiansL on 
the  other:  "If  any^one,  therefore,  accuses  them  and 
shows  that  they  are  doing  anything  contrary  to  the 
laws,  do  you  pass  judgment  according  to  the  crime. 
But,    by    Hercules!    if    any  one  bring  an  accusation 
through  mere  calumny,  decide  in  regard  to  his  crim- 
linality  and  see  to  it  that  you  inflict  punishment."2 
AjHadrian's  adopted  son  and  successor,  ^ntoninus  Pius 
(138-161),  a  wise,  upright  ruler,  interfered  to  protect 
Christians   at   Athens  _ and   Thessalonica^    His   edict, 
given  in  Eusebius,  is  proba^Ty^spurious,  though  the 
spirit  may  be  correct.3      TV^xms  Aurelius   (161-180). 
an   educated    Stoic    and   an   excellent    Emperor,    ei> 
ronraged  persecution  against,  those  guiltv  of  "sheer 
obstinacy."     Public    calamities    had    again    aroused 
the  mob  against  the  Christians.     The  imperial  decree, 
' '  not  fit  to  be  executed  even  against  barbarous  enemies," 
authorised  the  use  of  torture  to  discover  Christians 
and  to  compel  them  to  recant,  and  also  ordered  the 
confiscation    of    property.     This    order    to    seek    out 

*  For  an  excellent  discussion  of  the  significance  of  the  Trajan 
prosecutions,  see  Ramsay,  Ch.  in  Rom.  Emp.,  190-225. 

2  Authenticity  of  this  document  is  doubted  by  Baur,  Klein,  Lip- 
sius,  Overbeek,  Aube,  McGiffert,  etc.,  but  defended  by  Ramsay, 
Lightfoot,  Mommsen,  Allard,  Funk,  Ranke,  Uhlhorn,  Moeller, 
etc.     See  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.   i,  p.   10. 

^Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  iv.,  c.  13,  26;  Tertullian;  Harnack,  article 
on  Pius  in  Herzog-Hauck,  Real  Encyc. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians    103 


Christians,  and  not  await  formal  complaints,  seems 
to  mark  a  new  step  in  imperial  legislation.  Still  per- 
secution was  not  general,  but  confined  to  Lyons  and 
Vienne  in  southern  Gaul,  and  to  Asia  Minor.1 

The  period  from  180  to  249  saw  no  essential  changes^ 
Persecutions  were  merely  local,  and  depended  more 
upon  provincial  feeling  and  the  character  of  the  gov- 
ernor, than  on  the  Emperor.  Some  of  the  Emperors 
were  friendly  to  the  new  religion,  others  quite  hostile. 
Commodus  (180-193),  dissolute,  timid,  and  cruel, 
was  friendly  to  the  Christian^  owing,  probably,  to  the 
influence  of  his  favourite  concubine,  Marcia,  who  may 
have  been  a  Christian.3  Septimus  Severus  (193-2 11), 
an  able  soldier,  was  indifferent  to  the  new  faith  up  to 
202,  when  he  issued  a  rescript  forbidding  pagans  from 
becoming  Christians,  and  enforced  the  old  Trajan 
law  with  considerable  severity.4  Qaracalla  (21 1-2 17) 
and  Heliogabalus  (218-222).  two  of  the  most  con- 
temptible Roman  rulers,  both  tolerated  Christianity. 
The  former  recalled  banished  Christians;  the  latter 
sought  to  merge  Christianity  into  his  own  elective 
system  of  religion.  Alexander  Severus  (222-235)  ac- 
tually pave  Christianity  a  place  in  his  cosmopolitan,.  _ 
faith,  had  a  bust  of  Jesus  set  up  in  his  private  chapel,.  > 
allowed  churches  to  be  built^and  protected  the  Christ- 

1  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  v.,  c.  i;  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  i,  p. 
11. 

2  This  period  saw  seventeen  different  Emperors. 

»  See  Eusebius  on  this  reign,  Eccl.  Hist.,  v.,  c.  9-24. 

*  Clement  of  Alexandria  wrote :  "Many  martyrs  are  daily  burned, 
crucified,  and  beheaded  before  our  eyes. "  Origen's  father  was 
among  them.  At  Scillite  in  Numidia  200  suffered.  Transl.  and 
Rep.,  iv.,  No.  1,  p  20.  At  Carthage  two  young  women  were  given 
to  wild;  beasts.  Tertullian  refers  to  other  persecutions.  Euseb., 
Eccl.  Hist.,  vi.,  c.   1,  7. 


io4     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


» ians.  But  Christianity  was  not  legalised.  On  the 
contrary,  Ulpian.  the  great  jurist,  collected  for  public, 
use  in  case  of  need  all  the  imperial  laws  against  the" 
new  faith.1  JN^g^jmirms  the  Thracian  (235-238).  a 
coarse,  brutal,  military  leader,  ordered  that  all  officers 
<fi.\he  churches  should  be  "put,,  to  death  as  responsi- 
ble for  the  gospel  teaching." 2  !Pjiilip  the  Arabian 
(244-248)  wps-  reported  to  be  a  Christiar^-=at 
all  events  Christians  were  not  punished  during  his 
rule.3 

yfap-,jpst  period  of  persecution  (249-311)  was  cjrar^ 
acterised  by  civil  and  moral  decline  in  the  Emrjjre 
and  by  the  amazing  growth  of  Christianity,  which  had 
Become  bold  and  aggressive^.  It  must  either  be 
exterminated,  "or  else  adopted  as  the  state  religion. 
Hence  the  Emperors,  who  sought  to  restore  the  old 
power  and  splendour  of  ancient  Rome,  showed  the 
greatest  severity.  Ij)ecius  (240-251)  issuedLihe  first 
edirt.  of  npiyersal  persecution  (2^0)  as  a  pofitigal 
necessity.*  Local  officials,  under  the  threat  of  severe 
penalties,  were  required  to  compel  all  Christians  to 
conform  to  tr^,  state  religion.  g  Christians  might  flee, 
but  their  property  was  confiscated  and  their  return 
meant  death.  The  inquisitorial  process  was  em- 
ployed and  penalties  were  severe,  especially  for  the 
leaders,  s  Decius  declared  that  he  would  rather  hear 
of  the  rise  of  a  rival  Emperor  than  of  the  appointment 

1  Moeller,  i.,  191. 

2  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vi.,  c.  28;  Origen,  On  Martyrdom. 
3Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vi.,  c.  34. 

*  The  text  of  this  decree  has  been  lost.  Two  later  decrees  were 
issued — the  first  exiling  Church  officers,  the  second  condemning 
them  to  death.      See  Gregg,  The  Decian  Persecution. 

s  Read  Cyprian,  Concerning  the  Lapsed,  iii.,  c.  8,  for  the  most 
vivid  account;  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  Xo.  1,  p.  21. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians    105 


of  a  Roman  bishop.  *  Vg.Wiaji  (253-260^  ps  said  at_ 
first  to  be  "mild  and  friendly  toward  the  men  of  God, "  2 
but  public  disasters  and  tne  advice  ot  his  triehds 
led  him  to  renew  the  persecutions,  so  he  issued  an7 
edict  in  257  commanding  Christians  to  conform  to  the,,. 
state  religion  on  pain  of  banishment.  The  assembly 
of  Christians  w#s  ijo/bidden,3  and  the  bishops  were 
banished.  T£e  next  year  he  promulgated  a  second 
decree  more  sanguinary  than  that  of  Decius,  because 
it  condemned  all  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  to  death.4 
(^allienus  (260-268)  recalled  the  exiled  Christians. 
restored  their  church  property,  and  forbade  further 
persecution,5  but  Aurelian  (,?7ft-'>75,)  peered  the 
x)ld  Jaws  ^enforced  with  reflgffi|fl  vigour. 6  |  His  death, 
however,  prevented  the  execution  of  the  order; 
and  thus  the  Christians  had  about  forty  years  of 
peace. 

Under  Diocletian  (284-305),  a  warrior  statesman, 
occurred  the  last,  longest,  and  harshest  persecution. " 
It  was  mildest  in  the^West  and  worst  in  Syria  and 
Egypt,  and  endured  ten  years.  This  Emperor,  ap- 
parently, took  up  the  sword  very  reluctantly.  In 
287  he  issued  a  decree  against  the  Manichasans  in 
Egypt  which  was  a  general  condemnation  of  Christ- 
ianity. In  295  all  soldiers  were  ordered  to  sacrifice 
on  pain  of  expulsion,  or,  in  obstinate  cases,  execution. 
In  303  Christians  were  accused  of  burning  the  imperial 
palace   at   Nicomedia   and   suffered   accordingly.     An 

•*  •  Cyprian,  Ep.  to  Antonian.  .»•« 

2  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  vii.,  c.  10;  Gregg,  The  Decian  Persecution. 

3  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vii.,  c.  n. 

4  Cyprian,  Ep.,  81;  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  i,  20,  22,  23. 

5  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vii.,  c.  13  ff. 

6  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  1,  p.  26. 

'  Mason,  The  Persecution  of  Diocletian. 


io6     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


imperial  edict,  £jpmmanded  the  churches  to  "be  razed 
to  the  ground,  the  Scriptures  destroyed  by  fire," 
Christian  officials  degraded,  Christian  servants  en- 
slaved, bishops  imprisoned  and  forced  to  sacrifice, 
and  torture  employed  to  compel  Christians  to  con- 
form. *  Everywhere  these  laws  were  executed,  Eu- 
sebius  says,  with  great  severity  ^g^ij^jedced^bv^he 
pdiVtof  limited  toleration  by  Galeriuj^and  his  co- 
rggents  in  ^  1 1 , 2_  and  stopped  by  the  decree  of  xom- 
pletellloTeration  granted  by  Constantine  in  ^  i  ^  3  ajjfce,r_  a 
^QjjflUj^trugfile  of  250  years. 

The  results  of  the  persecutions  were  very  marked 
and  have  been  both  exaggerated  and  ignored: 

1.  SThcgrowtliof^lyjitiaj^^ 
than  hindered.  Persecution  advertised  the  new"  be- 
lief  and  won  sympathy.  It  created  an  intense  de- 
votion to  the  cause,  proved  the  truth  of  the  religion, 
and  made  a  martyr's  crown  desirable.  Tertullian 
exclaimed:  "Go  on!  rack,  torture,  grind  us  to  powcler; 
our  members  increase  in  proportion  as  you  mow  us 
down.  The  blood  of  Christians  is  their  harvest  seed. 
Your  very  obstinacy  is  a  teacher.  For  who  is  not 
incited  by  a  consideration  of  it  to  enquire  what  there 
is  in  the  core  of  the  matter?  And  who,  after  having 
joined  us,  does  not  long  to  suffer?"  The  period  of 
persecution  ended  with  a  conquest  of  the  Emperor 
and  a  large  part  of  the  Empire.  The  victory  was  thus 
a  double  one. 

T^he  organisation  of  the   Church   wa,s  ffiecfcert. 


2. 


1  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  1,  p.  26;  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  viii.-x.; 
Uhlhorn,  407. 

2  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  1,  p.  28;  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  viii.,  17. 

3  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.   1,  p.  29. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians    107 


efficiently,  produced  responsible  leaders,  who  were 
forced  to  direct  the  struggle  against  Rome  and  who, 
as  a  result,  were  gjvejL.pre-eminence  by  special  pun- 
ishment, and  developed  the  monarchio  -  episcopal, 
system.  The  extraordinary  development  of  the 
.power  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  in  particular,  was 
ir#luenced_to_aJai_^reater  degree  than  is  ordinarily 
taken  into  account.  Much  emphasis  has  been  laid  on 
the  fact  that  that  epoch  of  outlawry  ended  by  the. 
adoption  of  Christianity  by  the  Empire.  A  much 
more  important  result,  however,  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  Christianity,  for  weal  or  woe,  adopted  the  Roman^ 
Empire. 

3.  The  Church  was  kept  purer  in  belief  and  more  _ 
united  in  forrm_  The  spiritual  was  magnified  over 
the  temporal.  Common  oppression  joined  Christians 
in  common  sympathy.  The  differences  between 
Christianity  and  paganism  were  emphasised.  With 
death  over  their  heads  the  Christians  thought  little  of 
life  here  but  much  of  that  hereafter  and  regulated 
their  lives  accordingly.  Still  the  growing  conscious- 
ness that  the  Church  was  a  world-wide  institution 
must  have  been  powerfully  stimulated.  With  the 
evolution  of  the  idea  of  Christian  unity  appeared  the 
conspicuous  leadership  of  the  Roman  Church.  Irenaeus 
(d.  202)  could  declare  that  it  was  "a  matter  of  necessity 
that  every  church  should  agree  with  this  church,  on 
account  of  its  pre-eminent  authority."  Tertullian 
(c.  220)  also  recognised  the  distinction  of  the  Roman 
Church,  though  later  he  questioned  the  validity  of 
the  Petrine  claim.  It  was  left  to  Cyprian  (d.  258) 
to  give  the  first  complete  account  of  the  Universal 
or  Catholic  Church  in  his  work  on  the  Unity  of  the 
Church. 


io8     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


4.  Rersecution  produced  a  group  of  extraordinary 
literarydefenders  like  the  apologists,  controversialists^ 
andktter  writers,  and  helped  to  develop  the  fun- 
damental, orthodox  Christian  doctrine.  It  also  pro- 
ouced  much  legendary  poetry^  and  out  of  this  baptism 
oLhlopd  was  created  the  heroic  age "f  the_CHurch,  based  # 
partly  on  fact  and  partly  on  fiction.       %  5    t  __  #  >  ' 

5.  ^f  forms  of  worship  were  modified  s  the  wor- 
ship of  saints  and  relics  was  originated,  and  the  priest 

Tiood  was  i  sanctified  and  set  above  the  laity. 

6.  An^  .example  was  furnished  for  later  persecutions 
of  the  pap[ansT  Moha/nmedans.  Jews,  and  heretics. 

Sources 
A.— PRIMARY: 

I. — CHRISTIAN. 

i — New  Testament. 
2. — Church  Fathers. 

1. — Clement,  Ep.  to  Cor.,  ch.  5-7.     Lightfoot, 

Lond.,  1891. 
2. — Justin  Martyr,   1  ApoL,  ch.  5,   24,  31,   52. 

2  ApoL,  ch.  2,  8.     Dialog,  with  Trypho,  ch. 

no.     Ante-Nic.  Lib.,  ii.,  1,  2,  79. 
3. — Athenagoras,  Plea   for  the   Christians,  ch. 

1-4,  12,  31.  _  lb.,  ii.,  375. 
4. — Minucius  Felix,  The  Octavius.    lb.,  451-571. 
5. — Severus,   Sacred  Hist.,  ii.,  ch.  28-33.     Nic. 

and  Post-Nic.  Fathers  xi. 
6. — Tertullian,   To   Scapulam,  ch.  4.      lb.,   ii., 

49-51.     Apology,  ch.  2-16.     76.,  55-84. 
7. — Lactantius,  Divine  Institutes,  v.,  ch.  1,  9,  n. 

lb.,  xxii.,  92,  93,  98,  99.     About  the  Death 

of  Persecutors,   ch.    4,   7.      76.,    xxii.,   167, 

168,  170. 
8. — Origen,  A  gainst  Celsus,  i.,  ch.  3.     lb.,  x.,  400. 
9. — Cyprian,  Epistle  80;     To  Demetrianus,  ch. 

17.     76.,  viii.,  436. 
10. — Irenaeus,  Fragments,  ch.    13.      76.,  x.,  164, 

165. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians    109 


11. — Hippolytus,  Christ  and  Antichrist,  ch.  56,  60. 

lb.,  ix.,  34,  35. 
12. — Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist.     Various  eds. 

II. — HEATHEN    WRITERS. 

i. — Tacitus,  Annals,  xi.,  15;  xv.,  38-44. 
2. — Juvenal,  First  Satire,  verse  155  ff. 
3. — Suetonius,  Hist,  of  the  Twelve  Ccesars.     Tibe- 
rius, ch.  36;  Claudius,  ch.  25,  5;  Nero,  ch.  16, 
38;  Domitian,  ch.  12.     Bohn. 
4. — Dion     Cassius,    Hist,     of    Rome.     Xiphilin's 

Abridgment  in  Eng.     2  vols.     1704. 
5. — Pliny,  Letters,  x.,   96,  97.     Transl.  by  Lewis, 

Lond.,  1879. 
6. — Aurelius,  Meditations.,  xi.,  3.     Bohn,  1869. 
7. — Celsus,  Against  the  Christians.      Eng.  transl., 

Lond.,  1869. 
8. — Lucian,  The  Death  of  Perigrinus.     Transl.  by 
Tooke.     Lond.,  1820. 
3. — Collections. 

1. — Univ.  of  Penn.,  Translations  and  Reprints, 

iv.,  No.  1. 
2. — Foxe,  Acts  and  Monuments,  i. 

B.— SECONDARY: 

1. — special: 

1. — Addis,  W.  E.,  Christianity  in  the  Roman  Em- 
pire.    Lond.,  1893. 
2. — Baring-Gould,    Lives    of  the   Saints.     N.  Y., 

r873-7- 

3. — Bigg,  The   Church's   Task   under  the   Roman 

Empire.     Lond.,  1903. 
4. — Butler,  A.,  Lives  of  the  Fathers,  Martyrs,  and 

Saints.     Dub.,  1866. 
5. — Carr,  A.,  The  Church  and  the  Roman  Empire. 

Lond.,  1886. 
6. — Casy,  J.,  Trials  and  Triumphs  of  the  Church. 

Dub.,  1899. 
7. — Castelloe,    B.    F.    C,    The    Church   and    the 

Catacombs.     Lond.,  1894. 
8. — Croke,   A.   D.,   The  Church    and  the    Roman 

Empire.     Lond.,  1890. 
9. — Dollinger,  J.  J.  I.,  Hippolytus  and  Callistus. 

Edinb.,  1876.       First    Age    of    Christianity. 

Lond.,  1877. 


no     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


10. — Gregg,    J.    A.    F.,    The    Decian    Persecutions. 

Edinb.,  1897. 
11. — Hardy,   E.   G.,   Christianity  and    the   Roman 

Government.     Lond.,  1894. 
12. — Healy,  P.  J.,  The  Valerian  Persecution.     N.  Y., 

1905. 
13. — Lightfoot,   J.    B.,   St.  Clement  of  Rome,     i., 

69-81.     Ignatius,  i.,  69. 
14. — Mason,    A.    J.,     The   Diocletian    Persecution. 

Lond.,  1876. 
15. — Newton,     R.,    Heroes   of    the   Early   Church. 

Lond.,  1889. 
16. — Oxenham,    H.    N.,   Studies   in    Ecclesiastical 

History  and  Biography.    Lond.,  1884.     27-56. 
17. — Perram,  A.  F.,  Stories  about  the  Early  Christ- 
ians.    Lond.,  1887. 
18. — Pressense\  E.  de,  The  Martyrs  and  Apologists. 

N.  Y.,  1873.     i.,  ch.  2-14. 
19. — Ramsay,  W.  M.,  The  Church  in   the  Roman 

Empire.     N.  Y.,  1893. 
20. — Rankin,  J.,  The  First  Saints.     Lond.,  1893. 
21. — Renan,  E.    Marcus  Aurelius.     Antichrist. 
22. — Spence,    H.    D.    M.,    Early  Christianity   and 

Paganism.     N.  Y.  and  Lond.,  1902. 
23. — Steere,  E.,  Persecutions  of  the  Early  Church. 

Lond.,  1880. 
24. — Uhlhorn,  G.,  The  Conflict  of  Christianity  with 

Heathenism.     N.  Y.,  1879. 
25. — Watson,  F.,  Defenders  of  the  Faith.     Lond., 

1888. 
26. — Workman,    H.    B.,   Persecution  in   the  Early 

Church.     Lond.,  1906. 
11. — general: 

Alzog,  i.,  sec.  48,  64-70.  Backhouse,  pt.  2,  ch. 
2-8.  Bartlett,  ch.  2.  Baur,  ii.,  215-221.  Bouzique, 
i.,  ch.  3.  Burton,  ch.  2,  5,  7-11,  13,  16,  17. 
Butler,  ch.  6.-8.  Chantrel,  ch.  3.  Cheetham, 
ch.  3,  sec.  1.  Clarke,  ch.  1,  2.  Coxe,  ch.  2, 
sec.  27.  Croke,  ch.  1-10.  Crooks,  ch.  14.  Darras, 
i.,  ch.  1-14.  Dollinger,  i.,  ch.  1,  sec.  9,  10.  Duff, 
ch.  11,  1*3,  15,  16,  22-25,  3°-  Fisher,  pd.  2,  ch. 
1.  Foulks,  ch.  1-3.  Gieseler,  i.,  119.  Gil- 
martin,  i.,  ch.  5.  Guericke,  77-102.  Hase,  42-55. 
Hore,  ch.  3.       Hurst,    i.,   161-179.      Jackson,  ch. 


Rome's  Treatment  of  the  Christians    m 


2-3.  Jennings,  i.,  ch.  2-3.  Knight,  ch.  2-5. 
Kurtz,  i.,  sec.  21,  22.  Merivale,  6-8.  Milman, 
bk.  i.,  ch.  1.  Milner,  i.,  cent.  2-4.  Moeller,  i., 
74,  82,  159,  190.  Neander,  i.,  86.  Newman,  i., 
147.  Robertson,  bk.  i.,  ch  1-3,  5-7.  Schaff, 
ii-,  31  ff- 


CHAPTER  VII 

TRANSITION    OF    THE    CHURCH    UNDER    CONSTANTINE 

Outline  :  I. — Condition  of  the  Empire  in  300.  II. — How  Con- 
stantine  became  Emperor.  III. — Constantine's  conversion  to 
Christianity.  IV. — Constantine's  favours  to  Christianity.  V. — ■ 
Constantine's  character.  VI. — Constantine's  historical  significance. 
VII. — Sources. 

TO  understand  the  great  changes  that  took  place 
in  the  Christian  Church  under   Constant ine,  it 
is  necessary  to   keep  distinctly    in   mind   both 
the  status  of  Christianity,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
general  conditions  of  the  Empire,  on  the  other. 

In  territorial  extent  the  Empire  still  formed  a  huge 
fringe  around  the  Mediterranean  Sea  and  had  lost  but 
little  of  its  vastness  under  Trajan  (98-117).  Under 
Diocletian  (284-305)  the  Empire  became  an  undis- 
guised oriental  despotism.  The  administration  was 
divided  between  two  August! ,  each  of  whom  had  an 
associate,  called  Caesar.  This  division  of  rule,  with  it-j 
increased  expense,  aroused  much  jealousy  and  discon- 
tent, and  greatly  weakened  the  Empire.  As  many 
as  six  rival  Emperors  appeared  at  once,  and  out  of  the 
rivalry  emerged  Constantine  the  Great  as  the  sol-.. 
ruler  of  the  Empire.  Wars  with  the  Persians  in  the 
east  and  with  the  barbarians  on  the  north  accelerated 
the  declining  political  morality.  At  the  same  time 
social  classes  became  more  marked,  and  moral  standards 
lower.     Schools    were    neglected,    literature    became 

I  12 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  113 


superficial,  poetry  lost  its  voice,  and  oratory  declined. 
Paganism,  largely  a  form  of  patriotism  and  national 
festivity,  still  numbered  many  adherents,  but  it  was 
not  deeply  rooted  in  their  hearts. 

Christianity,  in  the  face  of  outlawry  and  severe  perse- 
cution, had  spread  steadily  and  marvellously,  and 
particularly  among  the  substantial  people  of  the 
Empire. 1  It  is  difficult  to  estimate  the  number  of 
Christians  because  few  records  were  left  and  the 
number  of  real  believers  was  much  larger  than  the  pro- 
fessed adherents.  The  earlier  estimates  are  probably 
too  low.  After  more  careful  investigation,  30,000,000 
may  be  safely  given  as  indicating  the  numerical 
strength  of  the  new  creed. 2  When  Constantine  the 
Great  appeared,  therefore,  old  pagan  Rome  was  declin- 
ing, while  a  new  Christian  Rome  was  rapidly  rising. 
Christianity  would  undoubtedly  have  gained  the 
victory  sooner  or  later  had  Constantine  not  appeared 
as  its  champion. 

Constantine  was  born  about  274  at  Naissus,  in 
Upper  Moesia.  His  father  was  Constantius  Chlorus, 
a  nephew  of  Emperor  Claudius,  the  conqueror  of  the 
Goths,  who  was  selected  as  Caesar  of  the  West  possibly 
because  of  his  imperial  connection.  His  mother  was 
Helena,  the  daughter  of  an  innkeepea,  and  not  the 
fabled  English  princess.  She  was  only  a  concubine, 
who,  however,  was  made  a  legal  wife  after  the  birth 
of  Constantine. 3     She  was  a  Christian,  it  seems,  and 

1  Orr,  Neglected  Factors,  95-163;  Ramsay,  Ch.  in  Rom.  Emp.,  57. 

2  Orr,  Neglected  Factors,  23-91. 

3  Zosinxus,  ii.,  8;  St.  Ambrose,  Migne,  iii.,  1209.  For  the  fable 
about  the  English  princess  read  Geoffrey  of  Monmouth  and  Pierre 
de  Langloft.  This  tale  was  used  by  Baronius.  It  must  be  remem- 
bered that  concubinage  was  a  state  recognised  by  Roman  law,  and 
was  by  no  means  in  itself  a  sign  of  depravity. 


ii4    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


no  doubt  taught  the  new  faith  to  both  her  husband 
and  son. * 

Constantine's    education    was    gained    mostly     in 
court  circles  and  on  the  battle-field.     As  a  boy  he  was 
instructed  in  the  schools  of  Drepanum  in  Cilicia,  his 
mother's    birthplace,    later    changed    to    Helenapolis. 
Little  is  known  about  this  phase  of  his  training,  and 
there  are  reasons  for  believing  that  it  was  not  very 
comprehensive.     In  292,  when  Constantine  was  eight- 
een, his  father  became  Caesar  of  the  West,  divorced  his 
mother,  and  sent  him  to  be  educated  as  a  sort  of- 
hostage  at  the  court  of  Diocletian  at  Nicomedia .     There 
he    acquired   his    preliminary    military    training    and 
political    education.     With    Diocletian    he    made    an 
expedition  to  Egypt  via  Palestine  (296)  and  the  next 
year  joined  Galerius  in  a  campaign  against  the  Persians. 
He  soon  won  a  reputation  as  a  bold  warrior,  and  became 
a  popular  leader.     Indeed  his  superior  ability  aroused 
the  jealousy  of  Galerius,  who  purposely  exposed  him 
to  the  gravest  dangers,  thus  hoping  to  get  rid  of  him. 
After  his  military  success,  he  was  made  tribune  of  the 
first  rank.     Skilled  in  the  art  of  politics  at  the  court  of 
the  Eastern  rulers,  and  having  won  his  spurs  in  battle, 
he  expected  to  be  elevated  to  the  office  of  Caesar,  when 
Diocletian  resigned  in  305,  but  was  defeated  by  Galerius, 
who  succeeded  Diocletian  as  Augustus,  and  chose  his 
own  nephew  as  Caesar.     This  was  a  keen  disappointment 
to  young  Constantine. 2 

In  305,  Constantius  Chlorus  succeeded  Maximian, 
who  had  resigned  by  agreement  with  Diocletian,  as 

«  Eusebius,  Life  of  Constantine,  iii.,  ch.  47,  leads  one  to  believe 
that  Constantine  converted  his  mother  to  Christianity.  Cf.  Hamza 
Ispaheus,  p.  55. 

2  Lactantius,  Death  of  Persecutors,  ch.  24. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  115 


Augustus  of  the  West,  and,  since  there  was  no  reason 
why  an  Augustus  should  leave  his  son  as  hostage  at 
the  court  of  an  equal,  he  demanded  the  return  of  Con- 
stantine. Galerius  reluctantly  consented,  but  before 
the  official  permit  was  executed,  Constantine,  fearing 
treachery,  fled  at  night,  maimed  the  post-horses  to 
prevent  pursuit,  and  reached  Boulogne  just  in  time 
to  go  with  his  father  to  Britain. J 

After  an  easy  conquest  of  Britain,  Constanti us  Chlorus 
died  at  York  (July,  306),  having  named  his  son  as  his 
successor,  whereupon  the  soldiers  immediately  saluted 
Constantine  as  Augustus.2  Although  this  was  the 
ancient  practice,  and  Constantine  was  eligible  for  the 
office  both  by  heredity  and  by  preparation,  still, 
constitutionally,  the  nomination  rested  with  Galerius, 
who,  enraged  at  the  usurpation,  and  also  at  Constan- 
tine's  shrewd  diplomatic  letter,  allowed  him  only  the 
title  of  Caesar.3  No  man  in  the  Empire  was  better 
fitted  by  age,  appearance,  previous  training,  and  ability, 
for  the  higher  office.  Backed  by  his  army,  Constantine 
continued  his  father's  policy  to  defend  the  Gauls  against 
the  Franks  and  Germans,  and  to  develop  the  prosperity 
of  the  country.  He  married  Maximian's  daughter  (307) 
as  a  diplomatic  precaution  and  was  recognised  by 
him  as  Augustus.  Meanwhile  Maxentius,  the  son  of 
Maximian,  who,  discovered  in  conspiracy,  had  com- 
mitted suicide,  had  assumed  the  imperial  purple  at 
Rome  and  now  took  his  father's  death  as  a  pretext  for 
war  against  Constantine.4     Encouraged  by  a  Roman 

«  Zos.,  ii.,  8;  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  i.,  ch.  xai. 

2  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  viii.,  ch.  13;  Life  of  Const.,  ii.,  ch.  22. 

3  Lactantius,  Death  of  Persecutors,   ch.  25.       Galerius  recognised 
Severus  as  Augustus  of  the  West. 

*  Galerius  meanwhile  was  induced  to  recognise  Constantine  as 
Augustus  in  308. 


n6     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


embassy,  Constantine  at  once  hastily  marched  toward 
Rome  and  at  Milvian  Bridge  defeated  his  rival,  who 
was  drowned  in  the  Tiber  (3 1 2) .  Constantine  was  n<  >\v 
sole  Emperor  of  the  West.  In  324  Licinius  was  de- 
feated in  the  East  and  Constantine  had  become 
Emperor  of  the  united  Roman  Empire. 

Constantine's  connection  with  Christianity  marks 
a  new  epoch  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  Under  him 
the  new  faith  was  legalised,  emancipated,  protected, 
and  given  lands  and  buildings.  Constantine's  mother, 
who  was  a  Christian,  probably  gave  him  his  first 
favourable  impressions  of  the  outlawed  religion. 
As  a  boy  he  must  have  heard  it  discussed  as  a  topic 
for  both  light  and  serious  conversation.  At  the  court 
of  Diocletian  and  Galerius  he  saw  the  edict  of  perse- 
cution proclaimed  in  303  and  must  have  witnessed  the 
action  of  Christians  under  martyrdom,  noticed  their 
marvellous  growth  in  the  face  of  outlawry  and  punish- 
ment, and  perhaps  came  to  look  with  some  favour 
upon  their  teachings.  When  he  succeeded  his  father 
as  Emperor  of  the  West,  he  continued  his  father's 
policy  of  toleration  and  let  Diocletian's  edict  of  perse- 
cution fall  as  a  dead  letter. 1 

Tradition  tells  us  that  Constantine  was  converted 
to  Christianity  suddenly  by  a  miracle.  One  day ,  during 
the  conflict  with  Maxentius  at  Milvian  Bridge,  he  and 
his  whole  army  saw  a  bright  cross  in  the  heavens 
with  this  inscription  in  Greek  on  it:  "In  this  sign, 
conquer."  In  a  dream  that  night  Christ  appeared  to 
him  and  commanded  him  to  use  the  emblem  of  the 
cross  as  his  battle  ensign,  and  promised  him  victory 
in    consequence.     Constantine    immediately    had    the 

1  Lactantius,  Death  of  Persecutors,  ch.  24;  Euseb..  Life  of  Const., 

i.,  ch.  14,  16,  17,  27. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  117 


costly  labarum  made  to  be  carried  before  his  army 
and  with  it  at  Milvian  Bridge,  ten  miles  from  Rome, 
he  vanquished  his  foe.1 

Three  theories  have  been  proposed  to  explain  the 
spectacle  of  the  cross:  1.  That  it  was  a  genuine 
miracle,  supported  by  the  following  facts :  (a)  Eusebius, 
who  gives  us  the  first  account,  had  all  the  evidence 
directly  from  Constantine  himself  under  oath;  (b) 
Constantine's  whole  army  "witnessed  the  miracle  and 
put  the  emblem  on  their  shields"  2 ;  (c)  Socrates  says 
the  original  standard  could  still  be  seen  in  his  day.  3 
The  older  historians  all  upheld  the  miracle,  although 
few  scholars  to-day  take  that  view.4  2.  That  it  was 
a  natural  phenomenon  coloured  by  Constantine's  im- 
agination, or  an  optical  illusion,  or  a  dream. s  3 .  That 
it  was  a  pious  fraud,  deliberately  invented  either  by 
Constantine,  or  by  Eusebius. 6  Whatever  the  theories 
may  be,  the  fact  remains  that  for  some  reason  Con- 
stantine invoked  the  aid  of  the  Christian's  God,  and 
carried  the  Christian  emblem  in  front  of  his  troops  to 
one  victory  after  another  until  he  became  sole  ruler  of 
the  Empire.     If  it  was  merely  experimenting  with  the 

1  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  i.,  ch.  28-31 ;  Sozomen,  i.,  ch.  3;  Socrates, 
i.,  ch.  2;  Lactantius,  Death  of  Persecutors,  ch.  44. 

2  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  i.,  ch.  28;  Sozomen,  i.,  ch.  3. 

3  Socrates,  i.,  ch.  2. 

*  Dollinger;  J.  H.  Newman;  Guericke,  Uhlhorn,  etc. 

s  Supported  by  best  modern  critical  writers  like  Schroeck, 
Neander,  Gieseler,  Mansi,  Milman,  Keim,  Heinicken,  Schaff,  Har- 
nack,  etc.  For  like  examples  see  Whymper,  Scrambles  among  the 
Alps,  ch.  22;  Gieseler,  i.,  §56;  Stanley,  288;  Peary,  Narrative  of 
an  Attempt  to  Reach  the  North  Pole,  99,  100;  Seymour,  The  Cross 
in  Tradition,  103  ff. 

*  This  theory  is  defended  by  Gibbon,  Lardner,  Waddington, 
Burckhardt,  Hoornbeeck,  Thomasius,  Arnold,  etc.  They  seem  to 
ignore  all  proofs. 


n8     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


name  and  cross  of  Jesus,  the  experiment  brought 
convincing  belief,  for  the  sacred  emblem  was  employed 
in  all  later  military  campaigns. 

The  triumph  over  Maxentius  at  Milvian  Bridge 
was  a  great  victory  for  Christianity .  Constantine  had 
a  statue  of  himself  with  a  cross  in  his  hands  set  up  in 
Rome.  An  inscription  on  it  stated  that  through 
Christianity  the  glory  and  freedom  of  Rome  had  been 
restored.  *  Henceforth  Constantine  extended  imperial 
aid  and  protection  to  the  Christians  and  a  new  era 
was  opened  in  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church.  He 
endowed  and  enlarged  Christian  churches  in  Rome 
and  later  elsewhere 2 ;  he  wrote  letters  in  behalf  of 
Christians  in  Africa  3 ;  he  made  Christian  bishops,  like 
Hosius,  Lactantius,  and  Eusebius,  his  trusted  political 
advisers ;  and  he  enacted  laws  legalising  the  new  faith 
and  protecting  its  adherents. 

The  edict  of  limited  toleration  passed  by  Galerius 
in  311,  in  conjunction  with  Constantine  and  Licinius, 
was  very  unsatisfactory.  The  Christians  might  rebuild 
their  churches  but  were  required  to  pray  for  the 
Emperor.4  A  decided  preference  was  shown  to 
paganism  since  no  person  was  free  to  leave  his  own 
religion  and  join  another.  This  was  a  great  hardship, 
for  many  Romans  were  Christians  at  heart  and  were 
only  waiting  for  permission  to  join  the  new  Church 
openly.5  To  meet  the  new  conditions  and  to  afford 
the  needed  relief,  Constantine,  jointly  with   Licinius, 

1  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  ix.,  ch.  9;  Life  of  Const.,  i.,  ch.  40.  The 
triumphal  arch  was  not  set  up  till  315. 

2  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  i.,  ch.  42. 

3  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  x.,  ch.  5,  7. 

4  Ibid.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  viii.,  17;  edict  given  in  Transl.  and  Reprints, 
iv..  No.  i,  p.  28.     Cf.  Lactantius,  ch.  34,  35. 

5  Neander,  ii.,  12,  13. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  119 


in  313  issued  the  Edict  of  Milan,  the  Magna  Charta 
of  "religious  liberty.  It  was  promulgated  in  Greek 
and  Latin  over  the  whole  Empire  as  imperial  law. 
It  did  not  make  Christianity  the  state  religion,  as  is 
generally  asserted,  but  only  legalised  it,  and  popularised 
it.  Now  people  could  and  did  openly  desert  the  old 
and  join  the  new  faith.  Persecutions  were  forbidden 
under  severe  penalties.  Exiles  were  recalled.  Con- 
fiscated property  was  restored  with  compensation  to 
the  possessor.  All  Romans  were  exhorted  to  worship 
the  Christian  God.  This  famous  edict  was  significant, 
because  it  put  Christianity  on  an  equality  with  pagan- 
ism; gave  it  opportunity  for  public  organisation,  thus 
paving  the  way  for  the  Catholic  hierarchy  already  begun ; 
and  marks  a  new  era  in  the  history  of  the  Christian 
Church,  because  at  last  a  great  Roman  Emperor  and 
his  conquering  army  had  taken  up  the  sword  in  defence 
of  persecuted  Christianity. 1 

The  proclamation  of  emancipation  and  protection 
was  followed  by  other  acts  which  clearly  show  that 
Constantine  meant  to  favour  and  control  the  new 
religion.  The  Christian  clergy  were  exempted  from 
military  and  municipal  duties2 — a  favour  already 
enjoyed  by  pagan  priests  and  even  Jewish  rabbis  (March, 
313).  The  Church  Council  of  Aries  was  convoked  (314). 
The  emancipation  of  Christian  slaves  was  facilitated 
(315).  Various  customs  and  ordinances  offensive  to 
Christians  were  abolished  (316).     Bequests  to  churches 

•  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  x.,  5.  The  Edict  of  Milan  is  given  in  Transl. 
and  Reprints,  iv.,  No.  1,  p.  29.  It  is  thought  by  some  that  the 
Edict  of  Milan  refers  to  an  edict  issued  by  Constantine  in  312 
but  now  lost.  That  possibility  seems  very  doubtful.  Cf.  Lactan- 
tius,  ch.  48. 

2  Euseb.,  Reel.  Hist.,  x.,  ch.  7;  Sozom.,  i.,  9;  Cod.  Theod.,  xvi.,  2, 
1,  2,  3. 


i2o     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


were  legalised  (321).     The  cessation  of  civic  business 
on  Sunday  was  enjoined,  but  as  a  "dies  Solis"  (321). l 
The  heathen  symbols   of  Jupiter,   Apollo,   Mars,  and 
Hercules  were  removed  from  imperial  coins  (323).  In  de- 
feating Licinius  (324),  a  bitter  reactionist,  Constantine 
felt   that   he   was    waging   war   in   behalf  of   Christ- 
ianity. 2     In  324  Constantine  issued  a  general  exhorta- 
tion to  all  Romans  to  embrace  the  new  creed  for  the 
common  weal.     The  highest  dignities  were  opened  to 
Christians.     Gifts  and  remission  of  taxes  enriched  their 
churches.     A  craze  for  buildings  led  to  the  erection  of 
churches  at  various  sacred  spots  in  the  Holy    Land, 
at  Nicomedia,  in  Constantinople,  in  Rome,   and  else- 
where.    Fifty  costly  manuscripts  of   the  Bible  were 
ordered    prepared    for    the    leading    churches.     The 
Council  of  Nicaea  was  held  in  325,  the  Arian  schism 
healed,  and  the  first  written  creed  given  the  Church. 
Finally,  by  divine  command,  as  it  was  said,  Constantine 
removed  his  capital  from  old  pagan  Rome  to  Byzan- 
tium, the  new  Chri^  vian  Rome,  which  was  renamed 
Constantinople    (326).     This   left  Christianity   in  the 
West,   already   strong   and   active,   to   organise  itself 
under  the  guidance  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  power- 
fully aided  the  evolution  of  the  papal  hierarchy.     In  the 
East,  under  imperial  protection,  the  spread  and  organisa- 
tion of  the  popular  belief  was  phenomenal. 

Paganism  was  still  legal,  however;  its  institutions 
were  not  attacked  and  the  privileges  of  its  priests  were 
confirmed.  Nevertheless  the  triumphs  of  Christianity 
were  all  won  at  the  expense  of  paganism.  As  the  new 
faith  arose  the  old  sank,  yet  not  without  many  a 

1  Cod.  Justin.,  iii.,  tit.  12,  1,3. 

2  Moeller,  i.,  298.  He  at  once  issued  edicts  of  toleration  for 
Christians  in  the  East.     Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  ii.,  ch.  24  ff. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine   121 


desperate  and  even  noble  effort  to  persist.  Individual 
cults  which  were  either  immoral  or  offensive,  like  that 
of  Venus  in  Phoenicia,  ^Esculapius  at  JEgee,  and  the 
Nile-priests  at  Heliopolis,  were  prohibited. 1  Private 
haruspices  were  forbidden.  There  is  even  some  evi- 
dence of  a  general  edict  against  sacrifices. 2  All  of  these 
things  indicate  the  passing  away  of  the  old  order  and  the 
birth  of  the  new. 

Opinion  about  Constantine 's  character  takes  two 
extreme  views.  On  the  one  hand  it  is  held  that  in  31  2 
Constantine,  like  Paul,  was  miraculously  converted 
to  Christianity  and  that  from  that  day  forth  he  was  a 
saint  incarnate.  Eusebius,  and  later  panegyrists  like 
Mosheim,  are  responsible  for  this  picture.  To  this 
day  the  Greek  churches  celebrate  his  memory  as  St. 
"Equal  of  the  Apostles."  On  the  other  hand  it  is 
asserted  that  he  was  nothing  but  a  shrewd  politician, 
able  to  read  the  signs  of  the  times,  who  assumed  an 
outward  connection  with  Christianity  solely  for  political 
expediency.  Zosimus,  a  pagan  historian,  gives  the 
worst  account,  ascribing  to  him  the  basest  motive  for 
every  deed.  Keim  calls  him  a  political  trickster,  and 
Burckhardt  styles  him  a  "murdering  egoist"  and 
"  politischer  Rechner  "  without  a  spark  of  Christianity.  3 

Was  Constantine  a  Christian?  The  query  is  a 
difficult  one  to  answer  because  ten  men  would  each 
give  a  different  definition  of  the  essentials  of  a  Christian. 
The  favourable  evidence  will  be  considered  first. 
Constantine's  activity  in  behalf  of  the  new  religion, 
already  mentioned,  shows  at  least  his  sympathy  for  it 

1  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  Hi.,  ch.  55,  56,  58;  iv.,  ch.  25,  37,  38. 

2  Ibid.,  ii.,  ch.  44,  45;  iii.,  ch.  56,  58;  iv.,  ch.  25. 

3  For  further  opinions  of  like  character  read  Brieger,  Flasch, 
Baur,  etc. 


i2  2     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  no  doubt  his  belief  in  it.  His  imperial  laws,  im- 
proving woman's  condition,  mitigating  slavery,  abolish- 
ing crucifixion  as  a  method  of  punishment,  and  caring 
for  the  unfortunate,  breathe  forth  the  spirit  of  Christian 
justice  and  humanity. 1  He  tried  to  convert  his  subjects 
to  Christianity  through  Christian  governors  in  the 
provinces,  by  letters  and  sermons,  by  rewarding  towns 
for  converting  temples  into  churches,  and  by  conforming 
to  Christian  worship.  He  diligently  attended  divine 
services,  had  a  stated  hour  and  place  for  prayer,  fasted, 
kept  Easter  vigils  with  great  devotion,  and  even  in- 
vited his  subjects  to  hear  him  preach  on  the  folly  of 
paganism  and  about  the  truth  of  Christianity.  He 
exerted  every  effort  to  make  Constantinople  a  Christian 
city — churches  replaced  altars,  the  imperial  palace  was 
adorned  with  biblical  scenes, 2  gladiatorial  combats  were 
prohibited,  and  the  smoke  of  public  sacrifice  never  rose 
from  the  hills  of  New  Rome.3  The  imperial  treasury 
was  lavishly  used  to  support  Christianity.  *  Constan- 
tine's  sons  were  given  a  Christian  education.  He  be- 
lieved in  the  efficacy  of  baptism,  even  though  he  did 
postpone  it  to  the  end  of  his  life — a  common  practice 
to  wash  away  all  sins.  Besides  he  wished  to  be  bap- 
tised in  the  river  Jordan  where  Jesus  himself  was 
baptised.  In  337  he  was  received  into  the  Church 
as  a  catechumen,  promised  to  live  worthily  as  a  follower 
of  Jesus,  was  baptised,  and  wore  the  white  baptismal 
robe  till  he  died. s 

1  Sozom.,  i.,  8;  Cod.  Theod.  and    Cod.  Justin  are  full  of  these 
instances. 

2  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  ch.  3,  49;  iv.,  ch.  15. 

3  Ibid.,  ii.,  ch.  44,  45;  iii.,  ch.  48;  iv.,  ch.  24. 

4  Ibid.,  ii.,  ch.  45;  iii.,  33-39,  41,  42,  43,  48,  58;  iv.,  28,  58-60. 

5  Brooks,  Date  of  the  Death  of  Constantine ;  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const., 
iv.,  62-64. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  123 


The  unfavourable  evidence  submitted  leads  to  the 
conclusion,  held  by  some  historians,  that  Constantine 's 
conversion  was  not  genuine,  but  due  to  hypocrisy, 
superstition,  or  policy.  He  retained  the  title  Pontifex 
Maximus,  head  of  the  old  religion.  The  Edict  of  Milan 
protected  paganism  and  he  continued  that  policy. 
After  defeating  Maxentius  at  Milvian  Bridge  he  had 
his  triumphal  arch  erected.  The  original  inscription 
said  that  he  triumphed  over  his  rival  by  the  favour 
of  Jupiter.  But  these  words  were  later  erased  and 
the  neutral  phrase  "instinctu  Divinitas"  substituted. l 
In  Rome  he  restored  pagan  temples  and  said:  "You 
who  consider  it  profitable  to  yourselves,  continue 
to  visit  the  public  altars  and  temples  and  to  observe 
your  sacred  rites."2  Even  in  Constantinople  temples 
were  erected  to  the  gods.  The  laws  of  319  show  that 
sacrifice  still  existed' — at  least  in  private  houses.3 
Pagan  emblems  were  continued  on  imperial  coins  till 
330.  Constantine,  as  Pontifex  Maximus,  continued  to 
attend  the  sacred  games  connected  with  the  pagan  re- 
ligion,4 and  even  used  pagan  rites  along  with  Christian 
to  dedicate  his  new  capital. s  In  321  he  ordered  that 
when  lightning  should  strike  the  imperial  palace,  or 
any  public  building,  the  soothsayers  should  be  consulted 
to  determine  the  cause  as  of  old.  The  same  year  he 
employed  heathen  magic  to  heal  diseases,  to  protect 
crops,  to  prevent  rain  and  hail,  etc. 6  He  retained 
many  pagans  at  court  and  in  public  office,  and  was  very 

1  Dyer,  City  of  Rome,  312. 

2  Cod.  Theod.,  xii.,  i.,  21;  v.,  2;  Neander,  ii.,  20. 

3  Ibid.,  19. 

4  Cod.  Theod.,  ix.,  16,  1,  2;  Zos.,  ii.,  ch.  29. 

5  Zos.,  ii.,  ch.  31;   Moeller,  i.,  299. 

6  Neander,  ii.,  20,  21. 


124     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


intimate  with  pagan  philosophers  like  Sopater. 1  In  no 
document  did  he  formally  renounce  paganism  and 
declare  himself  a  Christian.  He  was  guilty  of  weakness 
and  crimes  inconsistent  with  a  Christian  life.  He 
was  vain,  suspicious,  despotic,  and  gained  his  ambitious 
ends  through  bloody  wars.  He  was  undoubtedly 
guilty  of  murdering  Licinius,  his  brother-in-law,  con- 
trary to  a  sacred  pledge;  Licinius,  the  younger,  his 
nephew,  a  boy  of  eleven;  Crispus.his  eldest  son,  on  the 
ground  of  treasonable  conspiracy ;  and  Fausta,  his  wife, 
for  adultery. 2  To  wipe  away  these  sins,  and  many 
others,  he  accepted  at  the  close  of  his  life  the  Christian 
rite  of  baptism.  After  his  death  the  Senate  voted  to 
place  him  among  the  gods.3 

After  weighing  all  evidence,  these  historical  conclu- 
sions may  be  drawn: 

i.  Constantme  was  primarily  a  statesman,  and  wisely 
used  both  paganism  and  Christianity  to  unite  his 
Empire  and  to  build  up  his  autocratic  power.  He  was 
Pontifex  Maximus,  not  alone  of  paganism,  but  of  all 
religions.4  The  grateful  Christians  heartily  granted 
that  leadership.  Up  to  323  he  kept  the  two  religions 
equally  balanced,  but  to  do  so  he  was  forced  to  favour 
Christianity  most.  After  323  he  depressed  paganism 
and  exalted  Christianity.  Toward  the  end  of  his  life 
he  showed  a  tendency  to  forcibly  suppress  the  old 
religion. 

2.  Constantine  was  a  Christian,  but  not  as  a  result  of 
a  miracle  at  Milvian  Bridge.  His  conversion  was  a 
gradual  result  of  many   influences.     Training  at  his 

1  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  ii.,  ch.  44. 

2  This  last  charge  is  now  discredited  by  some  authorities. 

3  Eutropius,  Breviarum,  x.,  4. 

4  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iv.,  ch.  24. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  125 


Christian  mother's  knee,  paternal  instruction,  his 
youthful  observations  at  the  Eastern  imperial  court, 
a  growing  belief  in  monotheism,  his  discontent  with  the 
faith  of  his  fathers  and  a  proneness  toward  sun-worship, 
and  his  religious  philosophy,  which  led  him  to  look  at 
Christianity  as  a  system  of  thought  rather  than  a  life 
creed — a  law,  not  a  faith — a  world-force  of  purity  and 
simplicity — all  these  factors  produced  within  him  a 
growing  comprehension  of  the  truth,  power,  and  beauty 
of  Christianity.  The  cross  in  the  sky  and  the  conse- 
quent victories  led  to  a  conviction  that  God  had 
selected  him  as  the  champion  of  the  new  creed,  "the 
bishop  of  bishops."  Contact  with  the  leading  Christ- 
ians in  the  Empire,  men  of  heart  and  brains,  greatly  in- 
creased his  admiration  for  Christianity  and  interest  in  it. 
Just  when  he  became  a  Christian  no  one  can  say,  but 
that  he  died  a  sincere  believer  one  can  hardly  doubt. l 
3.  He  was  a  product  of  his  age.  He  was  actuated 
by  both  religious  and  political  motives  and  was  not 
merely  an  artful  politician.  It  was  not  an  easy  thing 
to  be  a  Roman  Emperor  and  at  the  same  time  a  Christ- 
ian. He  was  guilty  of  grave  crimes,  but  they  were  the 
result  of  gusts  of  passion,  like  those  of  Peter  the  Great, 
and  not  of  constitutional  depravity.  Nor  do  these 
sins  appear  so  enormous  when  considered  in  the  light  of 
his  long,  useful  career,  the  dynastic  difficulties  con- 
fronting him,  and  the  morality  of  many  Christian 
leaders  of  the  day.  It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  he 
was  a  converted  heathen,  that  the  Christian  code  had 
not  yet  become  the  moral  code,  and  that  the  integrity 
of  the  Empire  stood  above  family  ties  and  even 
religious  demands. 

1  Cutts,  Const,  the  Great,  419. 


26     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


4.  He  made  his  age  the  beginning  of  a  new  era. 
He  enabled  Christianity  to  become  the  moulding 
spirit  of  Western  civilisation.  He  was  the  first  repre- 
sentative of  that  theoretical  Christian  theocracy  which 
makes  the  Church  and  state  two  sides  of  God's  govern- 
ment on  earth.  The  Church  and  state  were  to  remain 
united  throughout  all  the  succeeding  ages  to  the 
present  time.  Even  Protestant  nations  adopted  the 
principle.  Among  the  most  noteworthy  exceptions 
to-day  are  the  United  States,  Italy,  and,  but  recently, 
France.  He  founded  the  Byzantine  Empire  and 
bears  the  same  relation  to  the  East  that  Charles  the 
Great  does  to  the  West.  He  gave  the  Church  its 
first  unity  in  organisation,  its  first  universal  council, 
and  its  first  written  creed.  He  stamped  his  own 
character  on  his  age  and  made  it  greater  and  happier. 
He  has  continued  to  live  through  succeeding  centuries 
by  reason  of  what  he  was  and  what  he  did.  For  all 
these  reasons,  judged  by  achievement,  the  world 
unites  in  calling  him  "the  Great." 1 

5.  Historically,  Constantine's  significance  lies  not 
in  the  fact  that  he  was  a  Christian,  personally,  but  that 
he  for  the  first  time  endowed  the  new  religion  with 
that  worldly  power  which  made  it  for  over  one  thousand 
years  the  most  powerful  moral,  social,  and  political 
agency  the  world  has  seen.  Constantine  the  Great  was 
succeeded  by  Charles  the  Great,  and  he  in  turn  by  Otto 
the  Great.  On  the  ruins  of  the  Christianised  Roman 
Empire  arose  the  Roman  Empire  of  the  Germans,  and 
in  this  the  work  of  Constantine  was  really  completed. 
Not  until  the  Reformation  and  the  Modern  Age  did  the 
cry  arise  that  the  work  of  Constantine  must  be  undone. 

1  See  Cutts,  Const,  the  Great,  128. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  127 


Constantine's  three  sons  and  successors  continued 
his  policy.  Laws  were  passed  favourable  to  Christian- 
ity. Paganism  was  still  tolerated,  but  the  tendency 
to  suppress  it  had  developed  into  a  fixed  policy. 
Sacrifices  were  forbidden  on  pain  of  death  and  con- 
fiscation in  352. 1  The  persecuted,  in  turn,  became 
the  persecutors.  "Emperors!"  one  of  the  Christian 
leaders  advised,  "the  temples  must  be  overthrown 
and  utterly  destroyed  in  order  that  the  pernicious 
error  may  no  longer  pollute  the  Roman  world.  The 
Supreme  God  has  committed  the  Government  to 
you,  so  that  you  may  cure  this  cancer."  Pagan 
temples  were  converted  into  Christian  churches. 
Unity  of  worship  and  unity  of  imperial  rule  were 
declared  to  be  essential.  Pagan  opposition  to  religious 
unity  under  the  Emperor  was  now  interpreted  as 
treason  just  as  Christianity  was  so  regarded  before 
311.  Thus  identified  with  the  Empire,  Christianity 
became  the  popular  dominant  faith.  Rome  and 
Alexandria  alone  clung  to  the  old  gods.2 

Under  Julian  (361-363),  a  nephew  of  Constantine 
the  Great,  paganism  made  one  last  supreme  effort  for 
mastery.  The  reaction  was  inspired  by  Neo-Platonism, 
by  the  personal  devotion  of  Julian  to  the  classical 
faith,  and  by  the  hope  of  securing  a  stronger  imperial 
unity  through  the  supremacy  of  paganism.  Julian 
did  not  openly  persecute  Christianity,  but  treated 
it  very  much  as  Constantine  did  paganism.  Had  he 
lived  longer,  nevertheless,  harsher  measures  might 
have  been  employed.  He  seemed  to  feel  that  he  was 
swimming  against  the  tide,  however,  and  fell  in  battle 

1  Cod.  Theod.,  xvi.,  10,  4. 

2  Gieseler,  i.(  §  75. 


*   i28     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


against  the  Persians  (363)   saying,   "Thou  hast  con- 
quered, Galilean."1 

Julian's  sudden  death  with  one  stroke  precipitated 
the  decline  and  fall  of  paganism.  His  successor,  Jovian 
(363-364),  a  Christian,  restored  Christianity  to  imperial 
and  popular  favour. 2  The  legal  toleration  of  all  relig- 
ions continued  under  Valentinian  I.  (d.  375)  and  Valens 
(d.  378).  Emperor  Gratian  (375-383)  began  the  repress- 
ion of  paganism  in  the  West,  and  Valentinian  II.  (383- 
392)  continued  it,  while  Theodosius  I.  (378-395)  pur- 
sued the  same  policy  in  the  East.and  forcibly  suppressed 
paganism.3  The  edict  of  380  constituted  Christian- 
ity the  exclusive  religion  of  the  whole  Empire.  "We 
command  all  who  read  this  law  to  embrace  the  name 
of  Catholic  Christians,  deciding  that  all  other  idiots 
and  madmen  should  bear  the  infamy  attaching  to  their 
heretical  opinions,  and  as  they  will  first  meet  with  the 
penalty  of  divine  vengeance,  so  they  will  afterwards 
receive  that  condemnation  at  our  hands  which  the 
Heavenly  Judge  has  empowered  us  to  administer."4 
The  new  faith  had  won  a  famous  victory.  Even 
the  old  Roman  Senate,  the  last  refuge  of  paganism, 
voted  that  the  religion  of  Jesus  was  true. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — church  fathers: 

1. — Eusebius,  Life  of  Constantine.  Nic.  and 
Post-Nic.  Fathers,  i.,  472.  Edited  by  Mc- 
Giffert.     Best  edition.     Church  History.     lb. 

1  Negri,  Julian  the  Apostate,  2  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1905;  King,  Julian  the 
Emp.,  Lond.,  1888;  Gardner,  Julian,  Philosopher  and  Emp.,  N.  Y., 
1895;  Rendall,  The  Emperor  Julian,  Lond.,  1879;  Sozom.,  vi.,  2; 
Theodoret,  iii.,  25. 

2  Sozom.,  vi.,  3. 

3  Cod.  Theod.,  xvi.,  10,  12.  «  Cod.  Justin,  i.,  1,  1. 


Transition  of  Church  under  Constantine  129 


2. — Socrates,  Ecclesiastical  History.     lb.,  ii.,  bk. 

1,2. 
3, — Sozomen,     Ecclesiastical     History.     lb.,    ii., 

bk.  1,  4. 
4. — Theodoret,   Ecclesiastical   History.     lb.,  iii., 

bk.  1,  2. 
5. — Lactantius,  Death  of  Persecutors.     Ante-Nic. 

Christ.  Lib.,  xxi.,  485;  xxii.,  186  ff. 
6. — Evagrius,  Ecclesiastical  History.     Bohn,  Eccl. 

Lib.,  1 85 1. 
7- — St.  Athanasius,  Works.    Fathers  of  the  Holy 

Cath.    Ch.,   viii.,   xiii.,   xix.     Nic.  and  Post- 

Nic.  Fathers,  iv.,  2d  ser. 
8. — St.  Basil,  Letters.     lb.,  viii.,  109. 
9. — St.  Augustine,  Sermons  on  the  New  Testament. 

Fathers  of  the  Holy  Cath.  Ch.,  Iv.,  ch.  12. 
IO_ — st.    Chrysostom,    Homilies.      lb.,   xxi.,    ch. 

11 ;  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  ix.,  1st  ser. 
11. — St.  Ambrose,  Letters,   No.    21,    23.     Fathers 

of  the  Holy  Cath.  Ch.,  xlv. 
I2. — St.   Cyril,    Catechetical   Lectures.      lb.,   xiv., 

ch.  22;  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  vii.,   2d 

ser. 
11. — pagan: 

1. — Zosimus,    History.     Transl.    by    J.    Davis, 

Lond.,  1814. 
2. — Emperor  Julian,  Letters.     Transl.  by  E.  J. 

Chinnock.     Lond.,  190 1.     Sovereign  Sun  and 

Mother  of  the  Gods,  in  King,  Julian  the  Em- 
peror.    Lond.,  1888. 

III. COLLECTIONS  : 

1. — Henderson,    Select   Historical  Documents   of 

the  Middle  Ages.     Bohn  Lib.,  1892,  p.  319. 
2. — Univ.  of  Penn.,  Translations  and  Reprints. 

iv.,  No.  1,2;  vi.,  No.  4. 
3. — Robinson,  Readings  in  European  History,  i., 

21. 
B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Carr,  A.,  The  Church  and  the  Roman  Empire. 

Lond.,  1886. 
2. — Chawner,  W.,  The  Influence  of  Christianity 

upon  the  Legislation  of  Constantine  the  Great. 

Lond.,  1874. 


130     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


3. — Cutts,  E.  L.,  Constantine  the  Great.     Lond.,. 

1881. 
4. — Fletcher,  J.,  Life  of  Constantine  the  Great. 

Lond.,  1852. 
5. — Gwatkin,     H.     M.,     Studies    of    Arianism. 
Camb.,  1882.     The  Arian  Controversy.    N.  Y., 
1889. 
6. — Hardy,  E.  G.,   Christianity  and  the  Roman 

Government.     Lond.,  1894. 
7. — Newman,  J.   H.,   The  Arians  of  the  Fourth 

Century.     Lond.,  1855. 
8. — Saunders,    G.,    The   State   of    the    Christian 
Community    before     and     after     Constantine. 
Glasg.,  1882. 
9. — Smith    and    Wace,   Dictionary   of    Christian 
Biography.     Art.  on  Constantine. 
11. — general: 

Allen,  ch.  1-2.  Alzog,  i.,  §  96-100.  Backhouse, 
pt.  2,  ch.  10.  Baur,  ii.,  225-228.  Blunt,  i.,  ch.  6. 
Bouzique,  i.,  ch.  3;  ii.,  ch.  1.  Bright,  60  ff.,  310. 
Butler,  ch.  23-26.  Cheetham,  pt.  ii.,  ch.  1.  Coxe, 
ch.  3.  Crake,  ch.  12-16.  Darras,  i.,  pd.  2,  ch.  1-2. 
Dollinger,  ii.,  ch.  1,  sec.  1.  Duff,  ch.  31,  37.  Fisher, 
pd.  3,  ch.  1.  Foulkes,  ch.  4.  Gibbon,  ch.  17-25. 
Gieseler,  div.  3,  pd.  2,  ch.  1,  sec.  75-77.  Gilmartin, 
i.,  ch.  10.  Guericke,  sec.  61-63.  Hase,  sec.  93-95. 
Hore,  ch.  5.  Hurst,  i.,  410-426.  Jackson,  ch. 
12-16.  Jennings,  i.,  ch.  4.  Knight,  ch.  6.  Kurtz, 
i.,  §42-43.  Mahan,  bk.  2,  ch.  10.  Milman,  bk.  1, 
ch.  2.  Milner,  i.,  cent.  4,  ch.  2-3.  Moeller,  i., 
296-308.  Mosheim,  ii.,  454-481.  Neander,  ii.,  1-32. 
Newman,  i.,  305-319.  Robertson,  bk.  2,  ch.  1. 
ScharT,  ii.,  1-37.     Stanley,  281. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE   COUNCIL    OF  NIC^EA   AND    ITS    RESULTS 

Outline  :  I. — Diversion  of  Christian  thought  in  the  early  Church. 
II. — The  Arian  controversy.  III. — The  Council  of  Nicasa  and  its 
actions.     IV. — Later  history  of  Arianism.     V. — Sources. 

EARLY  Christianity  was  characterised  by  a 
remarkable  intellectual  activity,  which  was 
chiefly  theological  and  philosophical.  Specu- 
lative discussions  were  rife,  particularly  in  the  East, 
where  the  different  philosophical  systems  were  promi- 
nent. Jesus  left  no  definite  creed,  which  all  could 
understand  alike. 1  The  Ante-Nicene  period  was  full  of 
sharp  and  bitter  theological  and  ecclesiastical  antag- 
onisms. Such  an  epoch  of  dissension  and  division 
the  world  was  not  to  witness  again  until  the  dawn  of 
the  Protestant  Revolt. 

Christian  converts  came  from  Judaism,  and  from 
various  types  of  paganism,  hence  at  the  very  outset 
there  was  a  tendency  to  create  two  distinct  types  of 
Christianity — the  Jewish  and  the  non-Jewish.  This 
lack  of  unity  and  uniformity  was  clearly  seen  and 
sneered  at  by  the  pagan  scholars. 2  This  was  Origen's 
significant  explanation: 

»  Epiphanius,  ch.  29,  30,  53. 

2  Notably  Celsus,  who  declared  that  the  Christians  "were 
divided  and  split  up  into  factions,  each  individual  desiring  to  have 
his  own  party." 

131 


132     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

Seeing  that  Christianity  appeared  an  object  of  veneration 
to  men,  and  not  to  the  labouring  and  serving  classes  alone, 
but  also  to  many  among  the  Greeks  who  were  devoted  to 
literary  pursuits,  there  necessarily  originated  sects,  not 
at  all  as  a  result  of  faction  and  strife,  but  through  the 
earnest  desire  of  many  literary  men  to  enter  more  pro- 
foundly into  the  truths  of  Christianity.  The  consequence 
was,  that  understanding  differently  those  things  which  were 
considered  divine  by  all,  there  arose  sects,  which  received 
their  names  from  men  who  admired  Christianity  in  its 
fundamental  nature,  but  from  a  variety  of  causes  reached 
discordant  views. 

Among  the  heretical  sects  of  the  Ante-Nicene  period 

were: 

i.  The  Ebionites,1  who  were  Judaising  Christians 
as  shown  in  the  book  of  Acts  and  the  Pauline  Epistles. 
They  desired  to  be  both  Jews  and  Christians,  and  ended 
by  being  neither.  They  soon  divided  up  into  many 
sects.2  They  lived  in  and  about  Palestine  for  the 
first  three  centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  They  believed 
that  God  made  the  world  and  gave  the  Mosaic  law, 
which  was  still  essential  to  salvation;  that  Jesus  was 
the  Messiah,  though  not  divine,  only  a  great  man  like 
Moses  and  David ;  but  they  denounced  Paul  and  heroised 
James  and  Peter.  They  observed  the  Jewish  Sabbath, 
retained  the  rite  of  circumcision,  and  observed  the 
law.  In  the  minds  of  the  great  body  of  orthodox 
Christians  they  were  regarded  as  heretics. 

2.     The  Gnostics3  embraced  various  factions,  mostly 

»  Irenaeus,  i.,  ch.  26;  Hippolytus,  ix.,  ch.  13-17;  Epiphanius,  ch. 
29,  30,  53;  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  iii.,  ch.  27;  Schaff,  ii.,  420;  Neander, 
i.,  341 ;  Moeller,  i.,  97 ;  various  histories  of  dogma  and  encyclopedias. 

2  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  iii.,  ch.  27. 

3  Irenseus,  Against  Heresies;  Hippolytus,  Refutation  of  all  Heresies; 
Tertullian;  Origen;  Epiphanius;  Gieseler,  i.,  129;  ii.,  442;  Moeller,  i., 


The  Council  of  Nicsea  and  Its  Results     133 


pagan  converts  to  Christianity,  which  nourished  in 
Syria,  Asia  Minor,  and  Egypt  chiefly  during  the  second 
century.  Their  ideas  can  be  traced  back  to  Philo's  Jew- 
ish-Alexandrian philosophy,  to  Buddhism  and  Zoroas- 
trianism,  and  to  the  old  Egyptian  religion.  Knowledge, 
above  all  else,  was  the  one  thing  desired.  Believing 
in  the  inherent  evil  of  matter,  they  sought  to  account 
for  a  bad  world  without  compromising  God.  Jehovah 
of  the  Old  Testament  was  rejected  as  the  Supreme 
Being.  They  cast  aside  all  the  New  Testament  except 
the  Pauline  Epistles  and  parts  of  the  Gospels.  They 
professed  to  apprehend  the  divine  mysteries.  Some 
advocated  asceticism,  and  others  gave  the  utmost 
license  to  the  flesh.  All  believed  in  the  idea  of  the 
evolution  of  the  world,  through  Christ,  to  an  ideal 
state.  Although  denounced  as  heretics,  they  left  a 
marked  influence  on  Christianity.  Gnosticism  was  so 
speculative,  however,  that  it  gave  rise  to  many  leaders 
and  creeds. 

3.  The  Manichseans1  accepted  Gnosticism  minus 
true  Christianity  and  adopted  Oriental  dualism  under 
Christian  names.  Manichaeism  originated  with  Mani 
about  238  in  Persia  and  spread  westward  over  the 
Christian  Church.  Its  leading  principle  was  absolute 
dualism  —  a  kingdom  of  light  and  one  of  darkness  in 
eternal  opposition,  yet  brought  together  by  a  sort  of 
pantheism.  Christianity  was  accepted,  but  explained 
in  terms  of  this  dualism.     The  Old  Testament  was 


129;  King,  The  Gnostics  and  their  Remains;  Neander,  i.,  566;  Mansel, 
The  Gnostic  Heresies;  Baur,  i.,  185;  Bright,  Gnosticism  and  Iremeus. 
>  Archelausin  Ante-Nic.  Lib.;  Epiphanius,  66;  Augustine  in  Nic. 
and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  1st  ser.,  iv. ;  Pressense,  Her.  and  Chr.  Doctrine; 
Gieseler,  i.,  203;  Schaff,  ii.,  498;  Moeller,  i.,  289;  Neander,  i.,  478; 
Mozley,  Manichceans;  histories  of  dogma  and  encyclopedias. 


i34     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


wholly  rejected  as  well  as  parts  of  the  New.  The 
elevated  priesthood  celebrated  the  secret  rites  of  bap- 
tism and  communion  with  solemn  pomp,  lived  as  as- 
cetics, possessed  no  property,  and  abstained  from  wine 
and  animal  food.  This  system,  claiming  to  be  true 
Christianity,  had  a  marked  influence  on  both  the 
doctrines  and  organisation  of  the  Church. l 

4.     The   Monarchians2   denied   the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  but  were  divided  into  a  number  of  groups. 
The  iUogoi  in  the  second  century  rejected  all  of  the 
Apostle  John's  works  and  denied  the  eternity  of  the 
Logos  as  a  person  of  the  Godhead.     Theodatus,   a 
leather  dealer  of  Byzantium,  went  to  Rome  in  190  and 
taught  that  Jesus  was  a  "mere  man"  till  baptism  gave 
him    divine    attributes.     Paul  of    Samosata,   Bishop 
of  Antioch,   was  excommunicated   in   269   for  advo- 
cating the  doctrine  that  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit    are    one    person,    God.     He    maintained    that 
Jesus  was  a  divinely  begotten  man  exalted  to  divine 
dignity  by  the   Holy   Spirit  or  Logos — an  attribute 
of  God.     Praxeas  of  Asia  Minor  visited  Rome  about 
195  and  later  preached  in  Carthage.     He  held,  that 
the  Father  and  Christ  were  one  and  attributed  the 
"Passion  "  to  God,  hence  his  party  were  called  the 
Patripassians.     Sabellianism  was  simply  another  form 
of  this  heresy  and  helped  to  precipitate  the  Arian 
controversy. 

In  addition  to  these  four  heretical  sects  there  were 
three  distinct  reactionary  and  reforming  parties : 

»  Augustine,  the  greatest  Latin  Father,  was  a  Manichaean  for 
many  years,  as  some  maintain. 

2  See  History  of  Doctrine  by  Fisher,  Shedd,  Sheldon,  Hagenbach, 
Baur,  Loofs,  and  Harnach;  Dorner,  The  Person  of  Christ;  Conybeare, 
The  Key  of  Truth;  encyclopedias. 


The  Council  of  Nicaea  and  Its  Results     135 


1.  Montanism1  originated,  like  so  many  radical 
movements,  in  Asia  Minor  (150?).  Montanus  professed 
to  have  received  a  message  from  the  "  Paraclete"  to  re- 
form the  growing  worldliness  and  the  lax  ecclesiastical 
discipline  of  the  Church.  Montanists  denounced  the 
innovations  introduced  into  the  Church,  and  sought  to 
return  to  the  simpler  and  purer  doctrines  and  organisa- 
tion of  the  early  Church.  They  preached  a  universal 
priesthood  of  all  believers.  In  exalting  virginity, 
widowhood,  and  martyrdom,  in  professing  a  contempt 
for  the  world  with  all  its  excesses,  and  in  insisting  upon 
an  arbitrary  holiness,  Montanism  was  a  force  paving 
the  way  for  ascetic  Christianity.  They  accepted  all 
the  fundamental  principles  of  the  Church,  but  pro- 
fessed to  receive  special  divine  revelations  from  the 
"Paraclete,"  as  the  Holy  Ghost  was  called.  They 
lived  in  constant  expectation  of  the  coming  of  the  end 
of  the  world.  Tertullian  was  their  greatest  apologist. 
But  both  the  Christian  hierarchy  and  the  imperial 
power  were  turned  against  these  reforming  puritans. 
Under  Justinian  Montanism  disappeared  (532). 

2 .  The  Novatianists 2  withdrew  from  the  Church  pro- 
testing against  the  readmission  of  those  who  through 
fear  deserted  the  Church  in  the  Decian  persecution 
(249-251).  They  were  strong  in  North  Africa  and 
Asia  Minor,  and  continued  until  the  sixth  century, 

1  Tertullian;  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist,  v.,  ch.  14-18 ;  Epiphanius,  Heresy, 
48,  49;  Sozomen,  ii.,  32;  Pressens£,  Heresy  and  Chr.  Doctr.,  101; 
Mossman,  Hist,  of  Early  Chr.  Ch.,  401;  Neander,  i.,  508;  Schaff,  ii., 
405;  Moeller,  i.,  156;  De  Sayres,  Montanism;  Uhlhorn,  Conflict 
vf  Christ'y  with  Heathenism;  Baur,  i.,  245;  ii.,  451  Ramsay, 
434;  encyclopedias. 

2  Euseh., Eccl.  Hist.,  vi.,ch.  43,45 ;vii.,ch.  8;  Cyprian,  ls£.,  41-52; 
Socrates,  iv.,  28;  Neander,  i.,  237;  Gieseler,  i.,  254;  Moeller,  i.,  263; 
encyclopedias. 


136     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


absorbing  most  of  the  Montanists.  In  doctrine  and 
organisation  they  did  not  differ  from  the  regular 
Church,  but  only  on  the  question  of  discipline.  They 
also  laid  unusual  stress  on  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
regeneration.  Their  churches  were  still  found  in  the 
fifth  century  in  Rome  till  closed  by  Innocent  I. 

3.  The  Donatists1  grew  out  of  the  Montanist  op- 
position to  laxity  and  innovation  in  the  Church  and 
Novatian  strictness  of  discipline.  The  Donatists  .de- 
nounced the  Christians  who  during  the  Diocletian  per- 
secution delivered  up  the  Scriptures,  and  tried  to 
drive  them  out  of  the  Church.  The  party  centred  in 
Carthage  and  was  led  by  Bishop  Donatus.  They  be- 
lieved in  ecclesiastical  purism,  held  the  Church  to  be  an 
exclusive  society  of  saved  sinners,  emphasised  inner 
holiness  as  a  qualification  of  membership,  asserted 
the  necessity  of  baptismal  regeneration  and  infant 
baptism,  said  unholy  priests  could  not  administer  the 
sacraments,  advocated  rigid  discipline,  resisted  the 
union  of  Church  and  state,  and  were  organised  as  a 
hierarchy.  They  were  very  active  in  the  early  part  of 
the  fourth  century,  and  attempted  to  secure  the  sup- 
port of  Constantine.  He  decided  against  them  and 
tried  to  quiet  them.  Emperor  Julian  favoured  them, 
but  Augustine  sought  their  overthrow.  Finally' the 
Vandals  swept  them  away. 

The  Arian  controversy  was  a  natural  product  of  the 
early  differences  about  the  nature  of  the  Godhead  and 
was  distinctly  connected  with  the  Ebionites,  Gnostics, 
Montanists,  and  Sabellians.  In  the  Eastern  specula- 
tion about  the  mystery  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  one  faction 

1  Augustine  in  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  iv.;  Hefele,  i.-ii.; 
Neander,  ii.,  214;  Schaff,  iii.,  360;  various  works  on  history  of 
doctrine;  encyclopedias. 


The  Council  of  Nicaea  and  Its  Results     137 


of  theorists  tended  to  "refine  the  Deity  into  a  mental 
conception";  another  to  "impersonate  Him  into  a 
material  being."  Between  these  extremes  arose  the 
discussion  about  "the  nature  and  relation  between 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost."  »  Tertullian  and 
Origen  both  attempted  to  solve  the  problem.  Diony- 
sius  of  Alexandria  (260) ,  in  a  contest  with  the  Sabellians, 
is  reported  to  have  declared : ' '  The  Son  of  God  is  a  work 
and  a  creature,  not  appertaining  to  Him  by  nature,  but 
as  regards  His  essence,  as  foreign  to  the  Father  as  the 
husbandman  to  the  vine  .  .  .  For  as  a  creature,  he 
did  not  exist  before  he  was  produced."2  Dionysius 
of  Rome,  backed  up  by  a  synod,  repudiated  that  propo- 
sition and  clearly  stated  the  orthodox  Trinitarian  view. 
Origen  widened  the  breach  by  asserting  the  eternal 
divinity  of  Christ,  but  at  the  same  time  maintaining 
also  His  subordination  to  the  Father  as  a  "  secondary 
God."  The  conflicting  schools  of  theology  at  Alexan- 
dria and  Antioch  were  ready  to  take  sides  in  the 
controversy,  which  reached  a  crisis  at  the  end  of  the 
third  century,  when  all  theological  thought  was  focused 
on  this  one  question. 

The  controversy  broke  out  in  Alexandria  in  318.3 
Bishop  Alexander  in  a  public  address  insisted  on  the 
interpretation  of  the  eternity  of  the  Son.  Arius,  a 
presbyter,  charged  the  bishop  with  Sabellianism,  which 
advocated  an  undivided  Godhead,  and  held  that  Christ 

1  Milman,  Hist,  of  Christ.,  i.,  65 

2  The  Bishop  of  Rome  held  a  synod  in  which  these  ideas  were 
denounced  and  the  orthodox  view  upheld. 

3  For  the  controversy  see  the  histories  of  Eusebius,  Socrates, 
Sozomen,  Theodoret,  and  Philostorgius ;  Epiphanius,  Heresy,  69; 
Athanasius;  Hilary;  Basil;  Ambrose;  Augustine;  the  two  Gregories 
and  Rufinus;  Newman,  Arians  in  the  Fourth  Cent.;  Gwatkin, 
Studies  of  Arianism. 


138     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


was  a  creature  of  God,  hence  not  coexistent  and  eternal. l 
He  and  his  followers  held  that  God  alone  was  eternal ; 
that  He  created  the  Son,  or  Logos,  by  His  fat,  hence 
the  Son  is  different  in  essence  and  finite ;  that  the  Son 
was  created  before  time  was  and  in  turn  made  the 
universe  and  rules  it;  that  the  Son  is  Logiffs  in  soul, 
stands  between  God  and  man,  and  is  to  be  worshipped  as 
the  most  exalted  of  creatures,  the  creator  and  ruler 
of  the  world,  and  the  Redeemer  of  men.  It  was 
contended  that  all  these  propositions  could  be  proved 
beyond  dispute  from  the  Bible. 2 

Alexander,  in  a  personal  interview,  sought  to  stop 
Arius,3  who  was  an  old  priest  in  control  of  the  most 
influential  church  in  the  city, — a  proud,  learned, 
ambitious,  and  fascinating  man,4  who,  defeated  in  his 
candidacy  for  the  arch-episcopacy  of  Alexandria,5 
began  to  foment  social  and  religious  circles  by  attacking 
Alexander.  Failing  to  quiet  him,  Alexander  called 
a  synod  to  discuss  the  disputed  points,  but  Arius  seemed 
to  carry  the  day  and  continued  his  agitation.  Then 
the  bishop  commanded  Arius  and  his  followers  to 
renounce  their  "impiety."6  Refusing  to  obey,  Arius 
was  called  before  a  local  council  in  320  and  there  ex- 
communicated.7 But  Arius  now  spread  his  views  all 
the  more  zealously  by  conversation,  by  letters,  by 
sermons,  and  later,  while  an  exile,  in  a  poetic  work 
called  The  Banquet.     His  doctrines  pleased  the  wide- 

'  Socrates,  i.,  ch.  5. 

J  Harnack,     Hist,  of  Dogma,  pt.  ii.,  ch.  7. 

3  Socrates,  i.,  6.    See  Neander,  ii.  403;  Schaff,  ii.,  616;  Gibbon, 
ch.  21;  Stanley,  Led.,  2-3;  Moeller,  i.,  382;  Kurtz,  i.,  317. 
*  Socrates,  i.,  5;  ii.,  35. 
'  Theodoret,  i.,  4;  cf.  Philostorgius,  i.,  3. 
6  See  two  letters  in  Socrates,  i.,  6. 
>  Ibid. 


The  Council  of  Nicaea  and  Its  Results     139 


spread  rationalism,  and  hence  became  very  popular. 
They  were  put  into  popular  songs  and  sung  everywhere, 
and  became  the  chief  topic  of  conversation  in  all 
social  circles.  Arius,  however,  was  forced  to  flee l  to 
Palestine  and  thence  to  Nicomedia,  while  Alexander 
drew  up  his  encyclic  to  all  Christian  Bishops  (323)2 
giving  the  history  of  the  controversy  and  defending  the 
Trinitarian  position. 

The  eastern  part  of  the  Empire  broke  up  into  two 
powerful  parties:  the  Arians  and  the  Trinitarians  or 
Athanasians.  "In  every  city  bishops  were  engaged 
in  obstinate  conflict  with  bishops  and  people  rising 
against  people."3  Theology  became  mere  technology. 
Staunch  partisans  came  forth  as  champions  on  both 
sides — Eusebius,  the  Church  historian,  Eusebius,  the 
Bishop  of  Nicomedia,  Chrysostom,  Theodore,  and 
Ephraem  stood  for  Arianism;  while  Athanasius,  Marcel- 
lus,  Basil,  Cyril,  and  Blind  Didymus  became  Alex- 
ander's supporters.  In  a  short  time  the  whole  Eastern 
Church  became  a  "metaphysical  battle-field."  Finally 
both  sides  appealed  to  Constantine,  who,  viewing  the 
contest  as  a  war  of  words,  wrote  a  common  letter  and 
sent  it  by  his  court-bishop  to  both  leaders  in  which  he 
said  that  the  quarrel  was  childish  and  unworthy  such 
churchmen;  that  moreover  it  was  displeasing  to  him 
personally,  hence  they  were  asked  to  stop  it.4  When 
this  imperial  request  failed,  Constantine  summoned  the 
Council  of  Nicsea  to  settle  the  dispute.5 

The  Council  of  Nicasa  was  summoned  by  the  Emperor     6" 

1  Theodoret,  i.,  5. 

2  Ibid. 

3  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  ch.  4. 

4  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  ii.,  ch.  64-72;  Socrates,  i.,  7. 
*  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  6. 


i4o     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


for  the  summer  of  325.  Constantine's  purpose  in 
cbi  veiling  it  was  to  settle  by  compromise  or  other- 
wise religious  disputes  which  might  easily  become  a 
political  danger  to  the  Empire.  It  was  the  first 
universal  council  of  Christendom.  Of  the  two  thousand 
persons  in  attendance  more  than  three  hundred  were 
bishops.  *  All  of  the  thirteen  provinces  in  the  Empire 
except  Britain  were  represented. 2  All  the  West,  how- 
ever, sent  but  six  representatives — good  proof  that  the 
Arian  controversy  was  an  Eastern  question.  The 
Bishop  of  Rome  was  too  old  to  go  so  he  sent  two 
presbyters  to  represent  him.3  Even  a  few  pagan 
philosophers  were  attracted  to  the  Council,  and  actually 
took  part  in  the  discussions.4 

In  organising  the  Council  the  bishops  were  seated 
according  to  rank.5  Discussions  occurred  for  some 
time  before  Constantine  arrived.  Then  the  Emperor 
entered  "as  a  messenger  from  God,  covered  with  gold 
and  precious  stones,  a  magnificent  figure,  tall  and 
slender,  and  full  of  grace  and  majesty."  He  opened 
the  Council  with  these  words :  ' '  When  I  was  told  of  the 
division  amongst  you,  I  was  convinced  that  I  ought  not 
to  attend  to  any  business  before  this;  and  it  is  from 
the  desire  of  being  useful  to  you  that  I  have  convened 
you  without  delay;  but  I  shall  not  believe  my  end 
to  be  attained  until  I  have  united  the  minds  of  all, 
until  I  see  that  peace  and  that  union  reign  amongst  you 
which  you  are  commissioned  as   the   anointed  of  the 

1  Historians  disagree  about  the  number;  Eusebius  gives  250; 
Theodoret,  300;  Milman,  323;  Dollinger,  318;  Gwatkin,  223;  etc. 

2  Gwatkin,  21. 

*  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  7;  Socrates,  i.,  14;  Sozomen,  i.,  17; 
Milman,  i.,  99. 

4  Socrates,  i.,  8;  Sozomen,  i.,  17,  18. 

5  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  ch.  10. 


The  Council  of  Nicsea  and  Its  Results   141 


Lord  to  preach  to  others."1  He  took  part  in  the 
deliberations  also  and  acted  as  the  real  head  of  the 
Council,  though  the  Spanish  Bishop  Hosius  probably 
served  as  the  spiritual  president.2  Only  bishops  or 
their  accredited  proxies  had  a  vote. 

Three  distinct  parties  immediately  appeared  in  the 
Council:  (1)  The  Arians  led  by  Arius.  Twenty  bishops 
with  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  at  their  head  constituted 
the  voting  party.  (2)  The  Semi -Arians  were  led  by 
Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  the  Church  historian.  They  had 
a  majority  and  were  inclined  partly  to  the  Arians  and 
partly  to  the  orthodox  side.  (3)  The  Trinitarians,  or 
orthodox  party,  led  by  Alexander,  Hosius,  Macarius, 
Marcellus,  and  Athanasius.  At  the  outset  they  were 
in  the  minority,  but  soon  came  to  control  the 
Council. 

Unfortunately  the  authentic  minutes  of  the  transac- 
tions are  not  now  extant,3  if  indeed  they  ever  existed. 
The  Arians,  it  appears,  came  to  the  Council  confident 
of  victory  because  the  Emperor's  sister  Constantia 
was  an  avowed  Arian,  and  he  himself  was  supposed  to 
be  a  sympathiser,  since  so  many  scholars  about  him 
upheld  the  doctrine.  But  when  Arius  presented  his 
creed  signed  by  eighteen  eminent  names,  it  created  an 
uproar,  the  creed  was  seized  and  torn  to  pieces,  and 
its  doctrines  repudiated.  All  the  signers  but  Arius  and 
two  bishops  then  abandoned  the  project.  Eusebius  of 
Caesarea  came  forward    at  this  juncture  with  an  old 

>  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  12;  Theodoret,  i.,  7;  Hefele,  Hist, 
of  the  Ch.  Councils,  280,  281. 

*  Hefele,  i.,  281;  Moeller,  i.,  336,  suggests  Eustachius  of  Antioch 
and  Alexander  of  Alexandria. 

1  No  minutes  in  the  modern  sense  were  kept.  After  measures 
were  agreed  upon  they  were  signed  and  thus  promulgated.  See 
Hefele,  i.,  262. 


142     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Palestine  creed  as  a  compromise.  1  It  acknow- 
ledged the  divine  nature  of  Jesus.  The  Emperor 
favoured  it,  and  the  Arians  were  willing  io  accept  it, 
but  Athanasius  was  suspicious  and  demanded  so 
many  changes  that  when,  after  two  months  of  solemn 
discussion,  the  amended  creed  was  passed,2  Eusebius, 
the  originator,  hesitated  to  sign  it.  This  was  a  grand 
triumph  for  the  orthodox  party.  The  Emperor  required 
all  bishops  to  subscribe  to  it.3  The  Semi-Arians  did 
so  under  protest.  Arius  and  two  Egyptian  bishops  4 
refused  and  were  banished  to  Illyria. s  Arius  was 
publicly  excommunicated  and  his  writings  ordered 
burned.  The  business  of  the  Council  concluded, 
Constantine  dismissed  it  with  a  splendid  feast  which 
Eusebius  likened  to  the  kingdom  of  Heaven. 6 
The  results  of  Nicaea  were  very  significant: 
i.  The  Church  was  given  its  first  written  creed, 
the  Nicene  Creed — the  basis  of  all-  later  creeds,  Greek, 
Latin,  and  Evangelical.7  This  was  the  first  official 
definition  of  the  Trinity  and  has  continued  to  be  the 
orthodox  interpretation.  The  Nicene  Creed  contains 
all  the  cardinal  Christian  doctrines.  It  was  universally 
proclaimed  as  imperial  law. 

2.  Church  canons  were  enacted — the  West  accepts 
twenty,  the  East  more — which  constitute  the  basis  for 

»  Theodoret,  i.,  12;  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  2d  ser.,  xiv.,  1. 

2  The  Nicene  Creed  of  the  Roman  Catholic,  Lutheran,  and 
Anglican  churches  is  not  this  one  but  "the  baptismal  creed  of  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem"  enlarged  in  362-373. 

3  The  Latin  list  of  names  numbers  228,  though  the  original  Greek 
lists  certainly  had  more.     Hefele,  i.,  296. 

*  Sozomen,  i.,  9,  21;  Theodoret,  i.,  7,  8. 
s  Sozomen,  i.,  21;  Socrates,  i.,  9. 
«  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  15. 

1  Univ.  of  Pa.,  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  2;  Schaff,  iii.,  631 ; 
Fulton,  Index  Canonum. 


The  Council  of  Nicaea  and  Its  Results  143 


the  canon  law  of  the  Middle  Ages.  *    These  canons  indi- 
cate the  burning  questions  in  the  Church  at  that  time. 

3.  The  method  of  calculating  the  date  for  Easter, 
which  differed  in  Eastern  churches  and  Western 
churches,  was  determined. 2 

4.  This  Council,  guided,  as  was  believed,  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  acted  as  the  infallible,  sovereign  power 
of  the  Church  and  set  precedents  which  later  conflicted 
with  the  supreme  power  claimed  by  the  Pope. 

5.  The  development  of  the  papal  hierarchy  was 
stimulated.  The  Bishop  of  Rome  was  recognised 
as  the  only  Patriarch  in  the  West.3  He  was  soon 
forced  to  be  the  recognised  champion  of  orthodoxy. 

6.  The  Council  of  Nicaea  marks  the  beginning 
of  the  breach  between  the  East  and  the  West  which 
resulted  in  the  first  great  schism  in  Christendom. 

7.  The  law  of  celibacy  was  almost  imposed  on 
the  Church.4 

8.  Interference  in  the  most  vital  concerns  of  the 
Church  was  recognised  as  an  imperial  prerogative. 
The  Emperor  called  the  Council,  presided  over  its 
proceedings,  acted  as  mediator  between  contending 
factions,  forced  the  Nicene  Creed  on  the  Church,  fixed 
the  day  for  celebrating  Easter,  and  approved  the  first 
ecclesiastical  canons. 

9.  The  various  heresies  and  schisms  of  the  time 
were  condemned.  This  action  threw  into  prominent 
relief  throughout  the    Empire  the  powerful  party  of 

»  Univ.  of  Pa.,  Transl.  and  Rep.,  iv.,  No.  2.     Cf.  Hefele,  i.,  355  ff. 

2  Excellent  discussion  of  the  whole  question  in  Hefele,  i.,  sec.  37. 

3  About  350  the  canons  were  interpolated  so  as  to  give  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  a  primacy. 

4  Socrates,  i.,  ch.  11;  Sozomen,  i.,  23;  Schaff,  ii.,  411;  Hefele,  i., 
435- 


i44      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


orthodox  Catholics,  who  henceforth  were  to  control 
the  destinies  of  the  Church  in  both  its  internal  and 
external  organisation  and  evolution. 

The  condemnation  of  Arianism  was  only  a  temporary 
victory.  Soon  Constantine  himself  was  won  over  by 
the  Arians,  invited  Arius  to  his  court,  and  ordered 
Athanasius,  who  meanwhile  had  become  Bishop  of 
Alexandria  (328),  to  reinstate  Arius  in  his  parish. 
Athanasius  refused  to  do  so,  and  was  condemned 
and  deposed  by  the  councils  of  Tyre  (334)  and  of 
Constantinople  (335),  and  exiled  by  the  Emperor  to 
Treves  in  Gaul.  Arius  died  before  he  could  be  recalled 
(336).  Constantine  II.  restored  Athanasius  to  his  see 
(338) ,  but  his  brother  Constantius  and  his  Arian  friends 
deposed  him  again  (339).  Athanasius  then  fled  to 
Pope  Julius  at  Rome  (339),  who  laid  his  case  before 
a  Western  council  (341)  which  vindicated  both  his 
creed  and  his  rights.  This  supreme  appellate  power 
assumed  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome  is  significantly 
prophetic. 

To  heal  the  Arian  conflict,  which  was  again  active 
— this  time  between  the  East  and  the  West, — the 
Council  of  Sardica  was  called  in  343.  The  Roman 
party  controlled  it,  reconfirmed  the  Nicene  Creed,  and 
adopted  twelve  new  canons.  The  Arians  refused  to 
take  part  and  held  a  rump  council.  The  result  was 
a  wider  separation  of  the  East  and  the  West. 1  Under 
Constantius,  however,  the  Arian  party  grew  stronger, 
held  the  three  Arian  councils  of  Sirmium  (351),  Aries 
(353),  and  Milan  (355),  forced  their  decrees  upon  the 
whole  Church,  exiled  Hosius,  Hilary,  and  Lucifer, 
drove   Athanasius,    who   had    meanwhile    once    more 

1  Hefele,  ii. 


The  Council  of  Nicaea  and  Its  Results     145 


returned  to  his  office  (346),  out  of  his  see,  and  even 
deposed  Pope  Liberius 1  and  elected  an  Arian  Pope, 
Felix  II.,  in  his  place.  Thus  the  Arian  party  seemed 
triumphant  East  and  West. 

But  the  Arians  soon  split  into  bitter  factions  and 
began  to  destroy  themselves.  Under  Emperor  Julian 
they  lost  imperial  favour  and  saw  the  Nicene  party 
tolerated.  The  orthodox  faction  was  thus  able  to 
gradually  re- win  power  in  the  West  and  South.  Theo- 
dosius  the  Great  (379-395)  externally  completed  the 
Nicene  conquest  of  the  whole  Empire  through  an  im- 
perial edict  (380)  and  by  calling  the  second  general 
'Council  of  Constantinople  (381),  which  ratified  the 
Nicene  Creed  in  a  revised  form  and  passed  seven  addi- 
tional canons.2  But  Arianism  lingered  long  within 
the  Empire,  especially  among  the  Teutons,  who  were 
slow  to  accept  the  Roman  faith — the  Vandals  in  530,  the 
Burgundians  in  534,  the  Suevi  in  560,  the  Goths  in  587, 
and  the  Longobards  in  600. 3  It  also  reappeared  again 
and  agayi  in  the  later  heresies  on  down  to  the  present 
day. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

I. CHURCH  fathers: 

1. — Eusebius,  Life  of  Constantine.  Nic.  and 
Post-Nic.  Fathers.  2d  ser.,  i.,  bk.  2,  3. 
Church  History.  lb.,  i. 
2. — Athanasius,  Works.  2d  ser.,  ib.,  iv.  Fath. 
of  the  Holy  Cath.  Ch.,  viii.,  xiii.,  xix. 
Bright,  W.,  Orations.     Oxf.,  1873. 

1  Pope  Liberius  was  reinstated,  after  the  death  of  Felix  II.,  on 
subscribing  to  the  Arian  articles. 

2  Univ.  of  Pa.,  Transl.  andRep.,iv.,  No.  2,  p.  11;  Nic.  and  Post-Nic. 
Fathers,  2d  ser.,  xiv.,  163. 

3  See  Hodgkin,  Italy  and  her  Invaders. 


146     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


3. — Socrates,  Ecclesiastical  History.  Nic.  and 
Post-Nic.    Fathers.      2d    ser.,  ii.,  bk.   1,  ctu 

*ff- 

4. — Sozomen,  Ecclesiastical  History.  2d  ser.,  ib.» 
ii.,  bk.  1,  ch.  17  ff. 

5. — Theodoret,  Ecclesiastical  History.  2d  ser., 
ib.,  iii.,  bk.  1,  ch.   1-13. 

6. — Philostorgius,  Eptiome  of  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory.    Bohn,  Eccl.  Lib.,  ii.,  429-528. 

II. COLLECTIONS  : 

1. — Percival,  H.  R.,  The  Seven  Ecumenical 
Councils.  In  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers, 
2d  ser.,  xiv.     N.  Y.,  1900. 

2. — Pusey,  E.,    The  Councils  of  the  Church   (to 

381). 
3. — Fulton,  J.,  Index  Canonum.     N.  Y.,  1892. 
4. — Lambert,    W.,    Canons    of    the    First    Four 

General  Councils.     Lond.,  1868. 
5. — Hammond,    W.    A.,    The   Six    (Ecumenical 

Councils.     Oxf.,  1843. 
6. — Bright,  W.,  Notes  on  the  Canons  of  the  First 

Four  General  Councils.     N.  Y.,  1892. 
7. — Mitchell,   E.    K.,    Canons  of  the  First  Four 

General  Councils.     Univ.  of  Pa.,  Transl.  and 

Repr.,  iv. 
8. — Chrystal,  J.,  Authoritative  Christianity.    Jer- 
sey City,  1 89 1.     Vol.  i. 
9. — Schaff,  P.,  The  Creeds  of  the  Greek  and  Latin 

Churches.    Lond.,  1877,  ii.,  28,  29,   57-62,  66. 
10. — Lumby,  J.   R.,   The  History  of    the    Creeds. 

Lond.,  1880.     Vol.  ii. 
11. — Howard,    G.    B.,    Canons  of    the   Primitive 

Church.     Lond.,  1896. 
B.— SECONDARY: 

I. SPECIAL 

i. — Boyle,    I.,    Historical    View  of   the   Council 

of  Niccea.     N.  Y.,  1856. 
2. — Bright,   W.,   Waymarks  of  Church  History. 

Lond.,  1894,  56  ff. 
3. — Bull,  G.,  Defence  of  the  Nicene  Faith.     1685. 

Transl.  in  Lib.  of  Anglo-Cath.  Theol.     Lond.,. 

1851. 
4. — Dorner,  I.  A.,  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  the 

Person  of  Christ.     Edinb.,  1861-3.     5  vols. 


The  Council  of  Nicaea  and  Its  Results      147 


5. — DuBose,   W.    P.,    The  Ecumenical  Councils 

N.  Y.,  1897. 
6. — Dudley,  T.  W.,  History  of  the  First  Council 

of  Niccea.     Bost.,  1880. 
7. — Gwatkin,  H.  M.,  Studies  in  Arianism.  Camb., 
1882.     The  Arian  Controversy.     N.  Y.,  1889. 
ch.  1,  2. 
8. — Hefele,  C.  J.,  History  of  the  Church  Councils. 

Edinb.,  1882-3.     Bk.  ii.,  ch.  1,  2. 
9. — Kaye,   J.,   Some  Account  of  the   Council  of 
Niccea.     Lond.,  1883. 
10. — Neal,    J.    M.,    History   of   the   Holy   Eastern 

Church.     Lond.,  1850-73. 
11. — Newman,  J.  H.,   The  Arians  of  the  Fourth 

Century.     N.  Y.,  1888. 
12. — Stanley,  A.  P.,  History  of  the  Eastern  Church. 

N.  Y.,  1875. 
13. — Swainson,  C.  A.,  The  Nicene  and  Apostolic 

Creeds.     Lond.,  1875. 
Note. — See  Chap.  VII.  for  additional  works. 
II. — general: 

Adeney,  ch.  1.  Allies,  v.,  ch.  37-39.  Alzog,  i., 
§  110-112.  Backhouse,  pt.  11,  ch.  11,12.  Bartlet, 
ch.  9.  Baur,  ii.,  11 2-1 20.  Bouzique,  ii.,  ch.  1. 
Butler,  ch.  24.  Cheetham,  pt.  2,  ch.  10,  11.  Coxe, 
ch.  2,  sec.  i5;ch.  3,  sec.  10-14.  Crooks,  ch.  21-23. 
Darras,  i.,  pd.  2,  ch.  1.     Dollinger,  i.,  ch.  2;  ii.,  ch. 

3,  4;  iii.,  ch.  2,  sec.  2,  3.  Duff,  ch.  33,  34,  35. 
Fisher,  104,  119,  130.  Fleury,  bk.  21.  Foulkes, 
ch.  4.  Gibbon,  ch.  21.  Gieseler,  i.,  sec.  81-84. 
Gilmartin,  i.,  16.  Guericke,  sec.  81-93.  Harnack, 
Dogma,  iv.,  ch.  1.     Hase,  sec.  102-104.     Hore,  ch. 

4.  Hurst,  i.,  431  ff.  Jackson,  ch.  11-16.  Jennings, 
i.,  ch.  4.  Kurtz,  i.,  §  49.  Mahan,  bk.  iv.,  ch.  1-6. 
Milman,  i.,  bk.  1,  ch.  2.  Milner,  i.,  cent.  4,  ch.  3,  4. 
Moeller,  i.,  331-337.  Neander,  ii.,  403  ff.  New- 
man, i.,  pd.  3,  ch.  2,  p.  323.  Robertson,  bk.  2, 
ch.  1.  Schaff,  iii.,  616-689.  Stoughton,  pt.  2, 
ch.  1. 


CHAPTER   IX 


RISE    OF   THE     PAPACY 


Outline:  I. — Favourable  conditions  when  the  Christian  era 
began.  II. — Forces  at  work  up  to  313.  III. — Description  of  the 
Roman  Church  in  313.  IV. — Growth  of  the  Papacy  from  313  to 
604.  V. — Condition  of  the  Papacy  at  the  close  of  this  period,  604. 
VI. — Sources. 

TO  see  how  a  handful  of  outlawed,  persecuted 
Christians  in  Rome  became  the  omnipotent 
hierarchy  of  the  Middle  Ages  is  to  comprehend 
the  most  marvellous  fact  in  European  history.  But 
when  the  conditions  and  forces,  which  produced  this 
wonderful  organisation,  are  clearly  understood,  the 
miracle  becomes  a  natural  and  an  inevitable  product. 
In  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era  Rome  was 
the  heart  and  mistress  of  the  world. 1  The  Apostle 
Paul  gloried  in  having  introduced  Christianity  into 
the  great  metropolis.2  The  Roman  Empire  had 
developed  an  imperial  and  provincial  system  of  govern- 
ment which  was  to  serve  as  the  model  for  the  organisa- 
tion of  the  Christian  Church.  This  decaying  Empire, 
after  a  futile  contest  with  Christianity,  was  to  become 
its  servant.  The  mighty  Catholic  Church  was  little 
more  than  the  Roman  Empire  baptised.  Rome  was 
transformed  as  well  as  converted.  The  very  capital 
of  the  old  Empire  became  the  capital  of  the  Christian 

>  Acts  xix.,  21;  xxiii.,  11 ;  xxv.,  11 ,  xxviii  ,  14  ff. 
2  Rom.  i.,  8. 

148 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  149 


Empire.  The  office  of  Pontifex  Maximus  was  continued 
in  that  of  Pope.  The  deeply  religious  character  of  the 
Romans  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  inadequate  and 
degenerate  religion  which  they  held  on  the  other,  were 
positive  and  negative  forces  enabling  the  Christian 
Church  to  make  rapid  conquests  in  territory  and 
numbers.  Even  the  Roman  language  has  remained  the 
official  language  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  down 
through  the  ages.  Christianity  could  not  grow  up 
through  Roman  civilisation  and  paganism,  however, 
without  in  turn  being  coloured  and  influenced  by  the 
rites,  festivities,  and  ceremonies  of  old  polytheism. 
Christianity  not  only  conquered  Rome,  but  Rome 
conquered  Christianity.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  great  sur- 
prise, therefore,  to  find  that  from  the  first  to  the  fourth 
century  the  Church  had  undergone  many  changes.  Dur- 
ing the  first  half  of  the  third  century  the  hierarchical 
scheme  of  Church  government  appeared  to  reach  a  very 
advanced  stage  of  organisation.  Cyprian  gives  us  the 
boldest  and  broadest  claim  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to 
the  heirship  of  Peter.  By  the  fourth  century  the 
hierarchical  and  monarchial  principles  were  fully 
developed,  and  the  Papacy  had  begun  its  wonderful 
career. 

The  leading  forces  operating  to  develop  the  Roman 
hierarchy  up  to  313  will  now  be  indicated. 

1 .  The  fundamental  factor  which  first  attracts  atten- 
tion in  the  consideration  of  this  problem  is  the  obvious 
advantage  in  location.  In  the  origin  of  the  civilisa- 
tion of  Western  Europe  three  cities  have  been  con- 
spicuous for  their  contributions — Jerusalem,  Athens, 
and  Rome.  Jerusalem,  the  sacred  city,  gave  Christian- 
ity to  the  West  and  through  the  West  to  the  world. 
Athens,  the  city  of  culture,  bequeathed   philosophy, 


1 50     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


art,  ideals,  and  science  to  the  Romans,  and  through 
them  to  the  Celts,  Teutons,  and  all  peoples.  Rome, 
the  city  of  power,  overthrew  Jerusalem,  took  Athens 
captive,  received  the  contributions  of  both  as  her 
right,  and  on  the  ruins  of  both  built  up  her  universal 
sovereignty.  The  rise  of  Rome  to  world  dominion 
is  one  of  the  deepest  mysteries  in  history.  Rome 
possessed  the  matchless  capacity  of  appropriating 
everything  on  earth  that  would  contribute  to  her 
greatness.  When  Jesus  appeared  to  give  the  world 
Christianity,  Rome  was  the  centre  of  all  power  and 
influence. 

Rome  was  in  the  highest  degree  adapted  to  spread 
civilisation  abroad.  From  Rome  influences  could  be 
sent  out  into  the  world  which  could  not  possibly  have 
emanated  from  Jerusalem  or  Athens.  In  fact  any- 
thing connected  with  Rome  assumed,  in  consequence, 
an  importance  by  virtue  of  Rome's  greatness  that  no 
other  part  of  the  world  could  give.  Christianity  in 
its  cosmopolitan  character  resembled  Rome  and  was 
drawn  thither  irresistibly  as  the  best  centre  for  pro- 
pagandism.  Hence,  from  the  outset,  the  Roman 
Christian  Church  was  a  church  of  world-wide  importance 
and  power,  and  her  bishop  the  most  influential.  Out 
of  the  ruins  of  political  Rome,  arose  the  great  moral 
Empire  in  the  "giant  form"  of  the  Roman  Church. 
In  the  marvellous  rise  of  the  Roman  Church  is  seen 
in  strong  relief  the  majestic  office  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome. ! 

2.  In  addition  to  the  favourable  location  and  ex- 
traordinary opportunity  that  site  gave,  the  fact  that 
the  Church,  planted  in  Rome  and  there  organised  by 

»  Gregorovius,  i.,  5. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  151 


Peter  and  Paul,  was  thus  established  on  a  double 
apostolic  foundation  gave  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  a 
respected  and  commanding  position  from  the  very  out- 
set. i  No  other  church  west  of  the  Adriatic  could 
claim  such  a  distinguished  origin.  It  was  both  easy  and 
logical,  therefore,  to  make  the  Bishop  of  Rome  not 
only  a  commanding  leader  in  the  universal  Church, 
but  more  particularly  the  conspicuous  head  of  the 
Church  of  the  West.2 

3.  The  theory  about  Peter's  primacy,3  asserted  cer- 
tainly as  early  as  the  second  century  and  generally  ac- 
cepted in  the  third  century,  gave  an  indelible  character 
to  both  the  person  and  office  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
and  elevated  him  high  above  all  other  officers  in  the 
Church.  The  actual  belief  in  this  theory,  a  fact  which 
cannot  be  questioned,  made  possible  the  realisation  of 
the  papal  hierarchy.  It  seems  to  be  an  actual  fact, 
likewise,  that  before  the  end  of  the  second  century 
the  pontiffs  of  Rome  had  assumed  a  title  implying  a 
jurisdiction  over  the  whole  Christian  world  as  successors 
and  representatives  of  Peter,  the  Prince  of  Apostles. 
Irenaeus  said:  "Because,  therefore,  of  her  apostolic 
foundation,  and  the  regular  succession  of  bishops, 
through  whom  she  hath  handed  down  that  which  she 
received  from  them  [the  Apostles],  all  churches,  that 
is,  all  the  faithful  around  her  and  on  all  sides,  must 
on  account  of  her  more  powerful  pre-eminence  resort 
to  this  church,  in  which  the  tradition,  which  is  from 
the  Apostles,    is    preserved."4     Tertullian,    after    he 


1  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  104,  107. 

2  The  East  had  four  Patriarchs :  Jerusalem,  Antioch,  Alexandria, 
and  Constantinople. 

•>  See  Chap.  VI. 

'■Against  Heresies,  iii.,  c.  3. 


152     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


had  joined  the  heretical  Montanists,  accused  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  of  assuming  the  titles  of  "  Pontifex  Maximus  " 
and  "Bishop  of  Bishops."1  He  complains  also  that 
the  "  Supreme  Pontiff"  was  in  the  habit  of  quoting  the 
decisions  of  his  predecessors  asconclusive  on  all  disputed 
questions,  and  that  he  furthermore  claimed  that  he 
himself  sat  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter.  These  charges 
show  how  early  the  Petrine  claims  were  made  and 
recognised.2 

4.  The  missionary  zeal  of  the  Roman  Church  soon 
Ird  to  the  formation  of  a  number  of  suburban  branches 
and  within  a  comparatively  short  period  to  the  spread 
of  Christianity  throughout  Italy  and  to  other  sections 
of  Western  Europe.3  These  local  churches  naturally 
looked  to  the  head  of  the  Church  in  the  great  capital 
for  assistance  and  instruction,  and  were  willing  to 
acknowledge  his  jurisdiction  and  pretensions.  The 
episcopal  organisation  of  the  Church  in  the  West,  which 
was  probably  present  from  the  beginning,4  made  the 
transition  to  the  hierarchy  comparatively  simple. 
At  Rome  the  process  may  be  more  plainly  traced  than 
in  connection  with  any  other  church. 

5.  The  persecutions  of  the  Christians  s  centred  in 
Rome  and,  consequently,  made  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
a  conspicuous  leader,  with  social  and  political,  as  well 
as  religious  duties,  whose  office  was  frequently  sanc- 
tified by  martyrdom.  The  persecutions  helped  to 
emphasise  the  necessity  of  a  better  organisation  on 
a  monarchio-episcopal  basis.     That  organisation  be- 

1  On  Modesty,  §1. 

2  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  107-108. 

3  Gibbon,  i.,  579  ff.     See  Chap.  V. 

*  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  175. 
5  See  Chap.  VII. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  153 


came  very  exclusive,1  and  made  a  responsible  head 
imperative.  Who  else  but  the  Bishop  of  Rome  could 
meet  the  demands?  To  him  was  given,  by  general 
consent  in  the  West,  the  headship  of  the  Church  and 
he  began  to  act  as  the  conscious  Pope  of  Christendom. 

6.  The  Bishop  of  Rome  was  the  only  official  organ 
of  communication  between  ;he  East  and  West.  He 
was  the  sole  Patriarch  of  all  the  united  West,  while  the 
East  had  four  Patriarchs,2  and  the  sixth  canon  of  the 
Council  of  Nicaea  confirmed  his  jurisdiction  as  an 
"ancient  custom."  From  Clement  (95) ,  whose  writings 
are  the  earliest  of  any  Bishop  of  Rome  preserved, 
onward,  he  speaks  in  an  authoritative  tone,  not  only 
to  the  churches  of  Carthage,  Italy,  and  Gaul,  but 
also  to  Greece,  Asia  Minor,  Palestine,  and  Alexandria. 
Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  Alexandria  and  Antioch 
also  claimed  Peter  for  their  founder,  yet  not  one  of  the 
four  patriarchates  attempted  to  contest  Rome's  claim 
to  priority  of  rank.  3 

7.  The  head  of  the  Roman  Church  was  the  champion 
of  orthodoxy  and  kept  the  Western  Church  free  from 
schism.  The  Church  of  Rome  stood  consistently  for 
purity  in  doctrine  and  steadfastly  opposed  that  Oriental 
mysticism  which  polluted  the  Eastern  churches  with  a 
host  of  heretic  and  theosophic  jugglers.  Epiphanius 
gives  a  list  of  forty-three  distinct  heresies  in  his  day.    It 

1  Origen  said:  ''Extra  hanc  domum,  i.e.,  extra  ecclesiam  nemo 
salvator."     Horn.  3. 

St.  Cyprian  of  Carthage  asked:  "Do  they  that  are  met  outside 
of  the  Church  of  Christ  think  that  Christ  is  with  them  when  they 
meet  ?  ...  It  is  not  possible  for  one  to  be  a  martyr  who  is  not  in 
the  church."      Unity  of  the  Church,  ch.  13,  14. 

2  Jerusalem,  Antioch,  Ephesus,  Alexandria,  and,  later,  Constan- 
tinople.   The  four  early  patriarchates  were  of  apostolic  foundation. 

3  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  193. 


i54     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


was  no  easy  matter  for  the  Church  of  Rome  to  faith- 
fully combat  all  these  theological  vagaries  and  point  out 
the  straight  but  narrow  way.  As  a  reward  of  her  fight 
for  the  simple  gospel-truth  the  provincial  churches 
bestowed  upon  her  their  affection,  confidence,  and 
obedience.  They  frequently  referred  for  their  own 
guidance  to  her  spiritual  experience,  in  deference  and 
respect  they  sought  her  counsels,  they  watched  her 
course  with  anxiety  and  faithfully  imitated  it,  and 
all  these  things  gave  her  a  singular  spiritual  influence 
and  authority  in  this  early  period,  which  was  not 
unlike  the  political  power  exercised  by  the  city  of 
Rome.  Again  and  again  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was 
requested  to  pass  judgment  on  the  various  heresies. 

8.  After  the  apostolic  days,  the  multitudes  who  em- 
braced Christianity  seemed  in  many  instances  to  lack 
the  original  fervour  and  spirituality.  Hence  to  control 
the  erring,  to  correct  the  heretical,  to  expel  those  who 
brought  disgrace  to  the  society,  and  to  protect  the 
faithful,  it  became  necessary  to  develop  some  more 
efficient  form  of  government. *  The  Roman  model 
of  imperial  and  local  government  naturally  suggested 
itself  and  was  either  consciously  or  unconsciously 
imitated.  The  gradual  transformation  of  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  into  the  Pope  of  Rome  was  the  product. 

9.  In  the  apostolic  days  the  practice  generally  pre- 
vailed of  referring  all  civil,  as  well  as  ecclesiastical, 
disputes  between  Christians  to  the  arbitrament  of  their 
superior  ecclesiastical  officials.  St.  Paul  even  went  so 
far  as  to  forbid  his  converts  to  resort  to  the  pagan  tri- 
bunals.2 This  work  devolved  upon  the  bishop,  as  a 
matter   of   course,  who  acted,  however,  rather  with 

1  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  164,  165. 
*  1  Cor.  vi.,   1,  13. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  155 


,U^f 


paternal  authority  and  through  moral  influence,  than 
in  accordance  with  fixed  Church  law.  Thus  special 
duties  were  laid  upon  the  Bishop  of  Rome  because 
of  his  superior  rank  and  extended  jurisdiction. 

So  rapidly  did  his  prerogatives  develop  that  he  was 
early  recognised  both  East  and  West  as,  practically, 
a  court  of  appeal.     About  95  a.d.,  Clement  of  Rome 
wrote  letters  of  remonstrance  and  admonition  to  settle 
a  wrangle  in  the  church  at  Corinth,  and  so  respected 
were  these  epj-s*1fF  fhat  for  a-  cepJagy  they  ^ere  pnhifpi- 
read_  in    the    churches.       About   the    year    150    one 
Marcian  was  excommunicated  by  his  bishop  and  ap-  s&j* 
pealed  to  Rome  for  admission  to  communion.      The  I  Jt 
petition   was  refused   but  it  shows   the  influence   of" 
the  Bishop  of  Rome.      Poly  carp  of  Smyrna  showed 
at  least  a  dutiful  deference  in  going  to  Rome  to  lay 
before  Bishop  Anicetus  (152)  the  disputed  paschal  ques- 
tion.  When  the  East  and  the  West  were  divided,  about 
190  a.d.,  upon  the  proper  day  for  celebrating  Easter, 
Bishop   Victor  of    Rome  assumed   the    authority   to 
decide  on  the  correct  day  and  insisted  that  all  Christen- 
dom conform  to  his  decision.     The  Eastern  churches 
refused  to  obey  him,  it  is  true,  but  the  Council  of  Nicaea 
enforced  universal  conformity  to  the  day  chosen  by 
Victor. l      When  Fortunatus  and  Cyprian  of  Carthage 
quarrelled   over   the    former's   claim   to   the   title   of    AAjJf% 
bishop,  Fortunatus  appealed  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  ' 
Cornelius,  for  official  recognition.     Cornelius  assumed 
the  righJLlo  remonstrate  with  Cyprian  and  to  deman 
an  explanation  of  his  conduct.   Cyprian  repudiated  loriffo 
eign  jurisdiction  in  the  domestic  affairs  of  the  Africa: 
Church,  but  at  the  same  time  recognised  Rome  as  "the 

«  See  Smith  and  Cheetham,  Diet,  of  Christ.  Antiq.,  for  a  full 
cussion  of  the  paschal  controversy. 


156     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


»'#» 


chair  of  Peter — that  principal  Church  whence  the  sacer- 
dotal unity  takes  its  rise."1  In  252,  two  Spanish 
bishops,  Basileides  and  Martialis,  were  deposed  for 
misconduct  by  a  synod  of  their  province.  They  ap- 
pealed to  Stephen,  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  peremptorily 
ordered  that  both  be  reinstated. 2  The  bishops  of  Gaul 
applied  to  Stephen  for  advice  as  to  what  to  do  with 
Martian,  the  Bishop  of  Aries,  who  had  embraced  Nova- 
tianism.3  In  the  West,  it  seems,  therefore,  that  prac- 
tically all  disputes  and  misunderstandings  were  re- 
%  *  ferred  to  the  recognised  head  of  the  Church  for  advice 
and  settlement.  Again  and  again  the  Eastern  Patri- 
archs appealed  to  the  Patriarch  of  the  West  for  support 
and  his  support  was  usually  decisive.  Likewise 
the  various  factions  in  the  many  Eastern  schisms 
strove  for  favourable  decisions  from  the  Roman 
Bishop.  In  260  Bishop  Dionysius  of  Rome  called  the 
Patriarch  of  Alexandria  to  account  for  false  doctrines. 
Even  a  Roman  Emperor,  Aurelian  (270),  declared  that 
no  one,  not  appointed  by  the  "bishops  of  Italy  and 
Rome,"  should  remain  in  the  See  of  Antioch.4  As 
a  result  of  these  appeals,  the  power  and  authority 
of  the  Roman  Bishop  were  magnified  so  that,  gradu- 
ally, he  came  to  claim  this  exercise  as  his  right,  and,  in 
addition,  precedents  were  set  which  were  to  become 
ecclesiastical  laws  in  the  next  period.5 

10    The  idea  of  one  Catholic  Church  seems  to  have 

V 
•  \n?    '|  1  Cyprian,  Ep.  49,  55.     Greenwood,  i.,  168,  thinks  this  quotation 

•^      *  a  later  interpolation. 

?\    '      '        2  Cyprian,  Ep.  68. 
friyVV%**      *  Ibid.,  Ep.67. 

«  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vii.,  30. 
00  <  s  it  must  be  remembered  that  Rome  had  no  monopoly  of  these 

ft.  .appeals  and  that  her  decisions  were  not  always  accepted  in  these 

•         early  days.     Cf.  Greenwood,  i.,  171  ff 

« *  **  *  •*  v.  •  •*  ■ 


•  • 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  157 


resulted  from  the  intense  struggle  against  the  various 
forms  of  heresy,  which  had  divided  the  early  Christians 
into  sects  somewhat  like  the  various  Protestant  denom- 
inations of  to-day.  This  conception  of  ecclesiastical 
unity  and  universality  had  two  sides:  doctrine  and 
ceremony.  To  teach  the  true  doctrine  and  to  perpet- 
uate sacramental  unity  the  priesthood  was  created. 
The  persecutions  emphasised  the  fundamental  doctrines 
which  united  all  Christians  and  made  them  conscious 
of  this  unity  of  belief.  In  orde  •  to  enforce  this  uni- 
formity the  Bishop  of  Rome  exercised  the  power  of  ex- 
communication. Victor  took  it  upon  himself  to 
excommunicate  the  Bishop  of  Ephesus  and  his  fellow- 
officials  for  refusing  to  conform  to  the  mode  of  cele- 
brating Easter  in  the  West  (190).  Irenasus  emphasised 
the  necessity  and  value  of  a  spiritual  unity  in  the 
Church, 1  and  to  "the  very  great,  the  very  ancient,  and 
universally  known  Church"  of  Rome  he  conceded  the 
most  accurate  apostolic  tradition. 2  He  declared  that  it 
was  "a  matter  of  necessity  that  every  church  should 
agree  with  this  Church,  on  account  of  its  pre-eminent 
authority."3  Tertullian  spoke  of  the  Catholic  Church 
as  if  its  eternal  unity  were  a  common  concept. 4  It  was 
left  to  Cyprian,  however,  to  boldly  hold  up  the  occu- 
pant of  the  See  of  Rome  as  the  representative  of 
both  the  organised  and  the  sacramental  unity  of  the 
Church  beyond  which  there  could  be  no  salvation.  In 
his  book  on  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  Cyprian  asked : 

He  that  abideth  not  in  the  unity  of  the  church,  doth  he 

»  Euseb.,  Reel.  Hist.,  v.,  23-25. 

2  Irenseus,  Against  Heresy,  iii.,  3. 

3  Library  of  Ante-Nic.  Fathers,  v. 

4  Ibid.,  xv. 


/ 


158     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


believe  that  he  holdeth  to  the  faith?  He  that  struggleth 
against  and  resisteth  this  church,  he  that  deserteth  the 
Chair  of  St.  Peter,  upon  which  the  church  is  founded,  can 
he  have  any  assurance  that  he  is  in  the  church?  .  .  . 
Likewise  .  .  .  Paul  teacheth  the  sacrament  of  unity- 
saying:  "There  is  one  body  and  one  spirit  and  one  hope  of 
our  calling;  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God." 
.  .  .  The  episcopate  is  indeed  one  .  .  .  the  church  also  is 
one  .  .  .  there  is  also  but  one  head  and  one  source.  .  .  . 
Whoever  is  excluded  from  the  church  ...  is  severed  from 
the  promises  of  the  church.  .  .  .  He  is  a  stranger,  an 
outcast,  and  enemy.  He  cannot  have  God  for  his  father, 
who  hath  not  the  church  for  his  mother.  .  .  .  He  that 
doth  not  hold  this  unity  doth  not  hold  the  law  of  God  .  .  . 
he  partaketh  not  of  life  or  of  salvation. l 

The  power  of  excommunication  to  preserve  the 
doctrinal  unity  and  purity  of  the  Church  implied 
some  share  in  appointment  and  administration.  From 
the  very  beginning,  no  doubt,  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
had  ordained  all  provincial  bishops,  and  few  matters 
of  great  importance  had  been  transacted  without  his 
consent  or  approval. 2 

The  same  tendencies  and  influences  that  led  to 
the  evolution  of  the  bishop  in  the  early  local  churches 
for  the  sake  of  order  and  efficiency,  produced  a  central- 
isation of  power  in  the  universal  Church.  With  the 
growth  of  the  idea  that  the  Church  had  an  outward 
organisation  developed  the  conscious  need  of  a  supreme 
bishop  who  could  rule  the  Church  somewhat  as  the 
Emperor  ruled  the  state.  That  such  a  unifying 
authority  was  generally  understood  to  exist  by  the 
time  of  Cyprian  seems  very  clear  from  contemporary 

1  Library  of  Ante-Nic.  Fathers,  viii. 

2  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  192. 


»1 


7 


•  *•****  •  *•»        •  .  *  ■  •».**• " ■•  ^   ** 

';*  Rise  of  the  Papacy  159. 

*        "  ♦        •  <     ■     ■■  1.    #  -A 

testimony.     But  it  took  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  m  .    . 

to  develop  that  leadership.  There  were  not  wanting, 
either,  on  all  sides  evidences  of  earlier  local  inde- 
pendence. The  rise  of  the  Papacy  was  the  logical 
culmination  of  the  episcopal  system.  It  must  be 
remembered  that  by  the  time  of  Bishop  Cyprian  the 
Church  had  undergone  a  series  of  wonderful  changes. 
The  Church  had  spread  outwardly  until  the  whole 
Empire  was  covered  and  included  all  ranks.  The 
Church  had  come  to  be  naturalised  in  the  Empire  and 
was  gradually  compromising  with  conditions.  Some 
conception  of  the  part  Christianity  was  to  play  in 
the  world  began  to  dawn  on  men's  minds.  The  ascend- 
ency of  the  See  of  St.  Peter  was  regarded,  therefore, 
quite  generally  as  a  necessity. 

11.  The  centralisation  of  wealth  in  Rome  rendered  .*»'' 

the  Church  there  the  wealthiest  in  Christendom.    These 
riches  were  lavishly  used,  during  the  first  three  hundred  ^\     it  %r 
years,  to  aid  the  poorer  communities.1     Such  favours   ^  .      * 
could  not  be  solicited,  or  received,  without  an  appreci-  *  m 


able  sacrifice  of  independence  on  the  part  of  the  recip- 
ients.    Ignatius,    considering  the  munificence  of  the 
*  TR.oman  Church,  and  wishing  to  confer  some  special  dis-*' 
tinction,  calls  her  "the  fostering  mistress  of  charity."2  . 

12.  From  the  time  of  Peter  to  Constantine  the  Great,      *l  i 3  !  i 

•     thirty -two  bishops  occupied  the  chair  of  the  Prince  of 

Apostles.      The  number  and  character  of  the  members 

of  the  Roman  Church  led  to  the  selection  of  the  ablest 

of  the  Western  Christians  to  occupy  that  important 

,  .office.  These  successive  bishops,  from  the  weight  of  their 

.•personal  influence,  transmitted  a  gradually  inrrfiasing 

power._    The  labours  of  a  few^ofthese  remarkable 

^  >  Tius/b.,  Eccl.  Htst.,  iv.,  23;  vn.,  6i 
•    2  To  Corinth,  Ep.  i.,  c.  44.  ^ 


e  Kise  of  the 


tfojC 


men  who  filled  the  Roman  See,  like  Clement,  Victor,  Cal- 

^^^    Jistus,  and  Stephen,  helped  powerfully  to  lay  the  founda- 

**?*  *jf  f   tions  for  the  Papacy.     Clement's  attitude  was  "almo^ 


imperious^.-  ,  Victor  in  his  presumption  on  the  Easter 
question,  Zephyrinus  on  the  assumption  of  his  proud 
title   of   Pontifex   Maximus   and   Bishop   of   Bishops, 
Callistus  concerning  lapsed  heretics,  and  Stephen  on 
the  baptism  of  heretics,  were  all  guilty  of  "hierarchical 
arrogance."1    Cyprian  (d.258)  looked  upon  Rome  as  the 
Cathedra  Petri  and  the  Roman  Church  as  the  head  of  the 
universal  Church.2     Thus  it  may  be  accepted  as  an 
established  fact  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was  generally 
accepted  as  Peter's  successor,  at  least  in  the  West, 
when    Emperor    Constantine    legalised    the    Christian 
religion  and  made  it  free  to  complete  its  organisation 
nd  to  carry  on  its  propagandism  openly.     He  also_ 
creased  the  wealth  and  power  of  the  Roman  See 
agor**made__its_lbishop    the   undisputed   headofthe~ 
g*j~AM "Western  Church.     At    the    same    time,  in    removing 
*  his  capital  to  Constantinople,  Constantine  permitted 


jlniit  3>ffi;he  Roman  Bishop  to  assume  imperial  prerogatives  and 
encouraged  the  completion  of  the  Church  organisation 
liter  the  imperial  mod^l     9t*A  ua«*«/»««u  rf-^nA 

A  comparison  of  the  Church  in  313  with  the  Apostolic 

t  Church  reveals  the  fact  that  many  pronounced  changes 

nd  developments  had  occurred.     In  extent  the  Roman' 

Church  had  spread  from  the  Eternal  City  over  the 

►^entire  Italian  peninsula   and   then  to  Spain.  France, 

ngland,  Germany,  and  Africa,  and  numbered  perhaps 

r  10,000,000  members.     In  organisation  the  Church  had 

■^  changed  from  a  democracy  to  an  absolute  monarchy, 

gi  ^from   many   local  centres  of  authority  to  ong  ^great 


% 


mM%4  ^'•Soha'ffjfii.,  35.1 

2  Ep.  43:  5;  55:  8;  59:  14;  Lib.  of  Ante-Nic.  Fathers,  viii. 


•*x*^ 


I 


4. 4 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  161 


world  power  based  on  an  imperial  hierarchy,  from 
communism  to  paternalism,  from  decentralisation  to 
centralisation,  from  apostolic  simplicity  to  worldly 
grandeur,  and  from  a  spiritual  organisation  to  one 
largely  political.  The  spiritual  shepherd  of  the  flock 
at  Rome  had  come  to  claim  and  to  exercise  superior 
prerogatives  over  Western  Europe  and  to  serve  the 
Roman  Emperor  as  virtually  his  spiritual  adviser. 
In  wealth  and  culture,  too,  the  Church  had  become 
a  powerful  social,  industrial,  and  educational  factor. 

In  institutions,  rites,  and  ceremonies,  as  well  as  in 
organisation,  the  Church  of  the  third  and  fourth 
centuries  was  very  different  from  that  of  the  first. 
K<  A  pompous  ritualism  with  suggestions  of  image  worship 
had  been  introduced. 1  Great  emphasis  had  come 
to  be  laid  upon  the  sanctity  and  power  of  holy  water, 2 
v  sacred  relics  and  places,  pilgrimages,  and  the  use  of  the 
cross.3  The  development  of  new  ideas  in  reference  to 
the  merit  of  external  works  resulted  in  asceticism  and 
a  celibate  priesthood,  fanatical  martyrdom,  indiscrim- 
inate almsgiving,  and  various  patent  methods  for 
spiritual  benefits.  At  the  same  time  the  number  of 
Church  festivals  had  greatly  increased  and  now  in- 
cluded Easter,  Pentecost,  Epiphany,  and  various 
saints'   days.4 

These  new  ideas  and  practices  naturally  gave  the 
priest  the  lofty  position  of  mediator  between  God  and 
man.  A  differentiation  in  the  ministry  gradually 
crept  in  as  an  outcome  of  the  hierarchical  spirit.  The 
Bishop  of  Rome  was  elevated  above  all  bishops  as 

>  Apost.  Const.,  viii.,  6-15;  Alzog,  i.,  §§92,  93. 
2  Apost.  Const.,  viii.,  28. 
a  Alzog,  §  95. 
*  Ibid.,  §  93. 


1 62     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


God's  chosen  representative  on  earth.  The  bishops 
were  exalted  above  all  the  presbyters  or  priests.  The 
priests  in  turn  held  a  position  far  superior  to  the 
subordinate  officials,  who  had  now  come  to  include 
sub-deacons,  readers,  acolytes,  precentors  or  cantors, 
janitors,  exorcists, 1  and  other  officials  of  minor  im- 
portance.2 These  under  officers  likewise  were  cut  off 
from  the  laity  by  a  pronounced  gulf.3 

To  conduct  the  general  affairs  of  the  Church,  synods 
and  councils  of  the  clergy  came  into  existence  as  early 
as  the  second  century.4  Roman  or  Greek  assemblies 
may  have  suggested  the  form  of  the  synod,  though  it  is 
more  probable  that  they  sprang  spontaneously  out  of 
the  needs  of  the  Church.  These  meetings  at  first  were 
irregular  and  very  informal  and  resulted  either  in 
resolutions  with  no  binding  force  on  the  dissentient 
minority,  or  in  a  letter.  There  were  four  classes  of 
councils:  (i.)  The  synod  of  a  single  diocese  which 
probably  existed  from  the  beginning.  (2.)  The  provin- 
cial council  of  the  bishops  of  several  dioceses.  This 
type  began  early  in  the  second  century.  (3.)  General 
councils  consisting  of  the  bishops  of  several  provinces. 
(4.)  Universal  councils  representing  the  whole  Church. 
When  Constantine  gave  Christianity  legal  recognition, 
councils  became  more  common  for  the  purpose  of 
formulating  common  rules  and  dogmas,  as  for  instance 
Aries  (314).  After  the  Council  of  Nicsea  in  325  the 
validity  of  earlier  decisions  was  recognised  and  given 
the   force   of   imperial   law.     Thus   had   the   councils 

1  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  vi.,  43. 
*  Alzog,  i.,  393. 

3  Hatch,  Org.  of  the  Early  Christ.  Churches,  143  ff. 

4  Euseb.,  Eccl.  Hist.,  v.,  16;  Tertullian,  De  Jejunus,  13  ;  Cyprian, 
Ep.  75;  Hatch,  Org.  of  the  Early  Christ.  Churches,  169,  170. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  163 


changed  in  a  few  years  from  local  to  general,  from 
recommending  to  sovereign  bodies. 1 

Paralleling  this  remarkable  evolution  in  the  organi- 
sation of  the  Church  was  a  marked  departure  from 
the  simplicity  and  purity  of  the  early  Christian  life  on 
the  part  of  both  clergy  and  laity.  The  "Apostolical 
Constitutions,"  the  "Canons  of  the  Holy  Apostles," 
and  the  decrees  of  the  councils  of  Elvira  (306),  Aries 
(314),  Neo-Caesarea  (314),  and  Nicaea  (325)  all  reveal 
the  worldliness  of  the  clergy  in  the  laws  passed  against 
their  engaging  in  worldly  pursuits,  frequenting  taverns 
and  gambling  houses,  accepting  usury,  habits  of 
vagrancy,  taking  bribes,  and  immorality.  Because 
the  multitude  of  pagan  converts  were  carrying  their 
ideas  and  practices  into  the  Church,  many  corrective 
measures  were  enacted  against  this  degeneration. 
The  licentiousness  of  the  clergy  became  a  still  more 
crying  sin  among  the  laity,  for  it  was  unreasonable 
to  expect  the  rank  and  file  to  be  better  than  their 
leaders. 

*See  Hefele,  Hist,  of  Ch.  Councils,  i.,  §1-17. 


CHAPTER  X 
rise  of  the   papacy — Continued 

THE  growth  of  the  Papacy  from  3 13  to  604  was  very- 
marked  and  may  be  traced  with  little  difficulty. 
In  fact  from  the  fourth  century  onward  the  proofs 
that  papal  supremacy  was  both  asserted  and  recognised 
are  so  numerous  that  it  is  only  necessary  to  select  typical 
cases  and  illustrations.  Certain  formative  influences 
and  forces  noticeable  in  the  period  prior  to  313  were 
continued  into  the  later  epoch  and  will  be  considered 
in  order  here. 

1.  The  missionary  zeal  of  the  Roman  Church  accom- 
plished wonders.  By  the  fourth  century  Spain  and 
Gaul  had  sufficient  Christians  to  warrant  the  division 
of  the  territory  into  bishoprics.  Some  of  the  Gallic 
bishops  were  imbued  with  a  remarkably  active  spirit 
of  propagandism,  notably,  St.  Hilary,  Bishop  of 
Poitiers  (350-66),  who  fought  the  Arians  incessantly; 
Honoratus,  Bishop  of  Aries,  who  inspired  others  to 
labour;  St.  Martin,  Bishop  of  Tours,  called  the  "Apos- 
tle to  the  Gauls,"  and  St.  Denis,  Bishop  of  Paris,  who 
suffered  martyrdom  for  the  cause.  Similar  workers 
were  found  in  Spain.  About  the  same  time  Celtic  mis- 
sionaries from  the  north  were  working  southward 
to  join  the  work  spreading  northward  from  Rome. 
Columba  laboured  among  the  Scots  and  Picts ;  Aidan,  in 
Northumbria;    Columbanus,    with    the    Burgundians; 

164 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  165 


Gallus,  in  Switzerland;  and  Amania  and  Kilian  in 
Thuringia.  From  Rome  went  forth  the  famous 
missionary  expedition  to  England  under  Augustine 
(596),  which  succeeded  in  winning  the  Anglo-Saxons 
to  a  belief  in  the  Roman  faith  and  to  a  recognition 
of  Roman  authority. 

In  return  a  counter-wave  of  missionary  activity 
spread  from  England  back  to  the  continent,  led  by 
Wilfrid  in  Friesland;  Willebrord  around  Utrecht; 
the  Ewald  brothers  among  the  Saxons;  Swidbert 
on  the  Ems  and  Yssel;  Adelpert  in  Holland ;  and  Boni- 
face, the  "Apostle  to  the  Germans,"  among  various 
Teutonic  tribes.  This  widespread  missionary  work 
resulted  in  eventually  bringing  all  Western  Europe 
under  the  subjection  of  the  Roman  Church.  Thus 
new  blood,  a  more  primitive  enthusiasm,  and  an  intense 
devotion  were  called  to  her  service,  and  all  powerfully 
aided  the  rise  of  the  Papacy. 

2.  The  continued  orthodoxy  of  the  Western  Church 
made  it  a  pillar  of  strength,  and  gave  its  head  a  com- 
manding position  in  dealing  with  heresy  and  schism. 
To  him,  more  than  ever,  did  people  East  and  West 
look  for  final  decisions  in  disputed  matters  of  doctrine, * 
and  contested  cases  of  jurisdiction,  rank,  territory, 
and  authority.  St.  Jerome  in  eloquent  words  besought 
the  liSun  of  righteousness — in  the  West"  to  teach 
him  the  true  doctrine  because  "here  in  the  East  all  is 
weed  and  wild-oats."2 

3.  The  claim  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  appellate 
jurisdiction,  which  had  been  exercised  more  or  less 
from  an  early  date,  received  a  sweeping  confirmation 
and  a  new  impetus  in  347  through  the  Council  of  Sardica. 

1  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  118. 

2  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  232. 


1 66     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


In  340,  Athanasius,  the  Patriarch  of  Alexandria,  the 
champion  of  orthodoxy,  appealed  to  Julian  I.  from 
an  unjust  decision  against  him  in  the  episcopal  courts 
of  the  East.  Julian  I.  called  a  council,  uo.  which  he 
invited  the  Eastern  bishops,  who  refused  to  attend, 
reversed  the  decision,1  and  completely  acquitted 
Athanasius.  He  wrote  a  strong  letter  of  reproof  to  the 
Arians  in  which  he  asserts  Rome's  canonical  supremacy 
in  initiating  conciliar  proceedings  against  ecclesiastical 
offenders.2  The  Council  of  Sardica  confirmed  the 
resolutions  of  the  Roman  Synod.  3  «- 

It  was  decreed  that  any  bishop,  who  might  feel  him- 
self aggrieved  by  an  unfair  trial,  could  have  the  judges 
write  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  asking  for  a  new  trial 
at  which,  if  it  seemed  wise,  priests  representing  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  could  be  present.  4  Meanwhile,  pend- 
ing the  trial,  no  successor  to  the  office  of  the  accused 
could  be  named.  This  action  made  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  referee  to  decide,  however,  not  the  case  itself, 
but  whether  there  ought  to  be  a  new  trial.  The  right 
was  conferred  "in  honour  of  the  memory"  of  St.  Peter 
and  hence  it  was  soon  claimed  as  an  inherent  preroga- 
tive of  the  apostolical  See  of  the  West.  Later  on  it 
was  positively  asserted  that  these  canons  gave  an 
appeal  to  the  Church  of  Rome  in  all  episcopal  cases. 
Whatever  the  original  intent  may  have  been,  the  fact 
remains  that  this  new  power  was  an  important  factor 
in  the  evolution  of  papal  supremacy.  The  Pope  was 
given  a  power  previously  possessed  exclusively  by  the 

>  It  must  be  said,  however,  that  the  Eastern  Patriarchs  refused 
to  recognise  the  decision.  Gieseler,  i.,  382;  Milman,  i.,  130.  Cf. 
Socrates,  ii.,  15  if. 

2  Hard.,  Concil.,  i.,  p.  610  ff. 

3  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  205. 
<  Can.  4,  5,  7. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  167 


Emperor.1  In  378,  Emperor  Gratian  added  civic 
sanction  to  the  judicial  authority  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  by  compelling  accused  bishops  to  go  to  Rome 
for  trial. 2  Ultimate  appellate  jurisdiction  was  definitely 
assigned  to  the  Pope  by  Emperor  Valentinian  III.  in 
445,  when,  of  his  own  motion,  causes  could  be  called 
to  Rome  for  papal  decision.  3  Emperor  Gelasius  (496) 
approved  in  very  positive  terms  the  judicial  supremacy 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.4  And  Gregory  the  Great 
(604)  assumed  it  as  an  indisputable  fact  that  every 
bishop  is  subject  to  the  See  of  Peter,  s 

After  this  period  cases  were  continually  referred  to 
Rome  for  adjustment.  St.  Basil,  Archbishop  of  Qesarea, 
appealed  to  Damasus  I.,  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth 
century,  for  protection.  In  398  the  Emperor  ordered 
Flavian  of  Antioch  to  proceed  to  Rome  for  trial.  He 
refused  to  go,  but  compromised  with  the  Pope.  St. 
John  Chrysostom,  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and 
head  of  the  whole  Eastern  Church,  early  in  the  fifth 
century,  appealed  to  Innocent  I.  against  the  persecu- 
tions of  Empress  Eudoxia  and  for  restoration  to 
his  see.6  Apiarius,  a  priest  of  Africa,  appealed 
to  Pope  Zosimus  against  the  censure  of  his  bishop 
in  416.  The  Pope  vindicated  the  priest  against  his 
bishop,  and  ordered  the  latter  either  to  revoke  the 

1  The  Council  of  Sardica  was  not  recognised,  however,  either  by  the 
churches  of  the  East  or  of  Africa. 

2  Mansi,  iii.,  624. 

3  Cod.  Theod.  Novell.,  tit.  xxix.,  Suppl.,  p.  12;  Robinson, 
Readings,  i.,  72.  The  same  power  was  conferred  by  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  (451)  on  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople. 
Canon  9. 

4  Ep.  13;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  72. 

5  Ep.  9. 

6  Greenwood,  i.,  270-279. 


1 68      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


censure  or  to  appear  at  Rome  for  trial. 1  St.  Augustine's 
letter  to  Pope  Celestine  in  424  shows  that  it  was  a  com- 
mon thing  to  refer  disputes  to  Rome  for  settlement. 2 
Both  St.  Cyril  and  the  Nestorians  appealed  to  Pope 
Celestus,  who  decided  in  favour  of  St.  Cyril.  Theodoret, 
the  Church  historian,  when  condemned  by  the  Council 
of  Ephesus  in  449,  appealed  to  Leo  I.,  who  asserted 
that  he  could  hear  appeals  from  any  source  as  a  court 
of  rirst  and  last  resort.3  These  appeals,  and  many 
other  similar  cases,  which  could  be  cited  both  East  and 
West, 4  show  the  growing  power  of  the  Roman  Pope, 
and  enabled  him  to  make  real  the  theory  of  his  suprem-<- 
acy.  To  enable  the  successor  of  St.  Peter  to  adjudicate 
cases  more  easily,  vicars  were  appointed  in  various 
parts  of  the  papal  empire  to  decide  finally  on  all  cases 
not  reserved  by  the  Pope.  This  arrangement  greatly 
enlarged  papal  jurisdiction  by  encouraging  and  facili- 
tating appeals.  ■ 

4.  The  removal  of  the  capital  of  the  Empire  from 
Rome  to  Constantinople  in  330,  left  the  Western 
Church,  practically  free  from  imperial  power,  to  develop 
its  own  form  of  organisation.  The  Bishop  of  Rome, 
in  the  seat  of  the  Caesars,  was  now  the  greatest  man  in 
the  West,  and  was  soon  forced  to  become  the  political 
as  well  as  the  spiritual  head.  To  the  Western  world 
Rome  was  still  the  political  capital — hence  the  whole 
habit  of  mind,  all  ambition,  pride,  and  sense  of  glory, 
and  every  social  prejudice  favoured  the  evolution  of 
the  great  city  into  the  ecclesiastical  capital.  Civil 
as   well  as   religious   disputes   were  referred    to    the 

1  Hard.,  Concil.,  i.,  947. 

2  Ep.  209. 

3  Ep.  4,  c  5. 

4  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  139. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  169 


successor  of  Peter  for  settlement.  Again  and  again, 
when  barbarians  attacked  Rome,  he  was  compelled 
to  actually  assume  military  leadership.  Eastern  Em- 
perors frequently  recognised  the  high  claims  of  the 
Popes  in  order  to  gain  their  assistance.  It  is  not 
difficult  to  understand  how,  under  these  responsibilities, 
the  primacy  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  established  in  the 
pre-Constantine  period,  was  emphasised  and  magnified 
after  313.  The  importance  of  this  fact  must  not 
be  overlooked.  The  organisation  of  the  Church  was 
thus  put  on  the  same  divine  basis  as  the  revelation  of 
Christianity.  This  idea  once  accepted  led  inevitably 
to  the  mediaeval  Papacy.  The  priesthood  came,  in 
consequence,  to  assume  all  the  powers  of  the  great 
Founder.  The  Mosaic  forms,  as  well  as  the  Roman 
Empire,  suggested  convenient  models  and  authoritative 
examples  for  the  new  structure.  It  is  not  difficult  to  de- 
tect in  the  oligarchical  Church  polity  of  the  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries  a  yearning  for  unity.  It  was  but  natural, 
therefore,  that  Rome  should  boldly  take  the  remedy 
into  her  own  hands  and  pose  as  the  authorised  repre- 
sentative of  the  visible  unity  demanded  by  the  Christ- 
ian world.  The  position  Rome  had  already  attained 
and  the  worthy  part  played  in  the  organisation  and 
spread  of  the  gospel  gave  her  a  superior  advantage, 
and  enabled,  nay  compelled,  her  bishop  to  become 
the  one  high-priest,  the  "universal  bishop." 

5.  In  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  the  Petiine 
theory  was  generally  accepted  by  the  Church  Fathers 
East  and  West.1  The  theory  had  become  a  dogmatic 
principle  of  law  founded  upon  historical  facts.  Opta- 
tus,  the  African  Bishop  of  Mileve  (c.  384),  strongly 
asserted  the  visible  unity  of  the  Church  and  the  im- 

1  Berington  and  Kirk,  Faith  of  Catholics,  ii.,  1-112. 


1 70     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


movable  Cathedra  Petri,  with  the  Roman  Bishop  as 
Peter's  successor.1  Ambrose  of  Milan  (d.  397)  gave 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  the  same  position  in  the  Church 
that  the  Emperor  had  in  the  Empire, 2  and  recognised 
him  as  the  great  champion  of  orthodoxy,  but  at  the 
same  time  called  Peter's  primacy  one  of  confession  and 
faith,  not  of  rank.  He  put  Paul  on  an  equality  with 
Peter.  Jerome  (d.  419)  recognised  the  Pope  as  the 
successor  of  Peter  and  said,  "Following  none  but 
Christ,  I  am  associated  in  communion  with  .  .  .  the 
chair  of  Peter.  On  that  rock  I  know  the  Church 
to  be  built.  "3  Innocent  I.  (414)  made  a  magnificent 
defence  of  the  theory.  Augustine  (d.  430),  the  greatest 
of  the  Latin  Fathers,  admitted  the  primacy  of  Peter 
and  recognised  the  Roman  Bishop  as  his  successor.4 
In  his  remarkable  book,  the  City  of  God,  he  did  more 
than  all  the  Fathers  to  idealise  Rome  as  the  Christian 
Zion.  Maximus  of  Turin  (d.  450)  and  Orosius  (d.  5th 
century)  bore  similar  testimony.  The  Greek  Fathers 
uniformly  spoke  of  Peter  in  lofty  terms  as  the  ' '  Prince 
of  Apostles,"  the  "Tongue  of  the  Apostles,"  the 
"bearer  of  the  keys,"  the  "keeper  of  the  kingdom 
of  Heaven,"  the  "Pillar,"  the  "Rock,"  et  cetera,  but 
they  held  generally  that  Peter's  primacy  was  honorary, 
and  that  he  transferred  his  power  to  both  the  Bishop 
of  Antioch  and  the  Bishop  of  Rome.5  But  these 
modifications  of  the  Petrine  theory  did  not  arrest  the 
evolution  of  the  papal  power.     The  important  historical 

1  Migne,  xi.;  Optatus,  lib.  ii.,  c.  2,  3;  lib.  vii.,  c.  3.     Mileve  is 
in  Numidia. 

2  De  Excidio  Satyri,  i.,  47;  Mansi,  Concil.,  iii.,  cal.  622. 

3  Jerome,  Ep.  15,  146;  Greenwood,  i.,  232. 

4  Ps.  contra  Don.;  Ep.  178;  Greenwood,  i.,  296. 

5  Ignatius,  Martyrs,  n.  4;    Horn.  ii.  in  Principium  Actorum,  n.  6, 
iii.,  p.  70;  Theodoret,  Ep.  83,  113,  116;  Cyril,  Ep.  ad  Coelest. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  171 


fact  to  be  taken  into  account  is,  that  the  belief  in  the 
supremacy  of  St.  Peter's  successor  was  quite  generally 
recognised  and  accepted. 

6.  The  growth  of  conciliar  prerogatives  tended  to 
advance  the  development  of  papal  authority.  The 
Council  of  Nicaea  (325)  gave  the  Western  Church  the 
Nicene  Creed,  practically  made  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
its  defender,  and  recognised  him  as  the  sole  Patriarch 
of  the  West  with  ten  provinces  as  his  diocese. 1  The 
Council  of  Sardica  (343),  in  reality  only  a  local  Western 
body,  decreed  that  deposed  bishops  might  appeal  to 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  for  a  new  trial,  that  vacant 
bishoprics  could  not  be  filled  till  his  decision  was 
received,  and  that  he  could  delegate  his  power  to  a 
local  synod.  This  gave  him  a  kind  of  appellate  and 
revisory  jurisdiction  in  the  case  of  deposed  bishops 
even  in  the  East. 2  It  is  claimed  that  this  was  a  new 
grant  for  a  specific  case  and  in  deference  to  Pope  Julian 
alone.  This  power  was  confirmed  by  Emperors 
Valentinian  I.  (364-375)  and  Gratian  (375~383)-3 
In  this  manner  the  Roman  Popes  were  furnished  the 
opportunity  to  claim  universal  jurisdiction.  The 
Council  of  Aquileia  (381)  begged  Emperor  Gratian 
to  protect  "the  Roman  Church,  the  head  of  the 
whole  Roman  world  and  that  sacred  faith  of  the 
Apostles."4  The  African  councils  of  Carthage  and 
Mileve  (416)  sent  their  actions  against  Pelagius  to 
Innocent  I.,  for  his  approval.     The  councils  of  Ephesus 

1  Canon  6;  Gieseler,  i.,  378.  Later  an  interpolation  made  canon 
6  read:  "Rome  has  always  held  the  primacy."  First  used  at 
Chalcedon  in  451. 

a  Canons  3,  4,  and  5;  Mansi,  iii.,  23;  Sardica  was  not  a  universal 
council. 

3  Milman,  i.,  101.     Cf.  Hefele,  i.,  539;  Greenwood,  i.,  239,  240. 

*  Mansi,  Concil.,  iii.,  cal.  622. 


172     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


(431)  and  Chalcedon  (451)  gave  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
a  primacy  in  rank  and  honour,  which  he  soon  made  a 
primacy  in  power.1  The  latter  body  recognised  the 
necessity  of  obtaining  the  Pope's  confirmation  to  insure 
legality.  Here  again  the  Bishop  of  Rome  had  usurped 
a  prerogative  claimed  by  Constantine  and  his  successors. 
Later  the  Popes  called  most  of  the  councils,  presided 
over  them  in  person  or  through  legates,  and  confirmed 
I  :ir  proceedings  in  order  to  give  them  legality. 
7.  The  power  of  excommunication,  an  authority  in- 
herent in  all  societies,  was  early  developed  and  ex- 
ercised by  the  Roman  Bishop.  This  right  was 
clearly  recognised  in  the  New  Testament. 2  The  power 
of  excommunication  was  originally  put  into  the  hand 
of  the  local  bishops.  They  expanded  the  biblical 
precepts  into  a  penal  code,  and  assumed  the  right  to  act 
as  judges  and  to  pronounce  censure  or  final  excommuni- 
cation. The  apostolic  constitutions  and  canons  reveal 
a  direct  substitution  of  the  authority  of  the  bishops 
for  that  of  Christ  in  these  particulars.  Excommunica- 
tion, for  the  first  three  centuries  of  the  Christian  era, 
was  looked  upon  as  a  remedial  and  corrective  measure 
to  prevent  a  breach  of  discipline,  disobedience,  and 
heresy.  It  is  a  significant  fact,  therefore,  that  the 
Roman  bishops,  by  the  third  century,  claimed  the 
power  to  put  out  of  communion,  not  only  individuals, 
but  whole  communities,  who  did  not  conform  to 
Roman  usages  and  beliefs,  even  though  the  sentence 
could  not  always  be  enforced.  Innocent  I.,  imbued 
by  the  lofty  idea  of  the  prerogatives  of  his  office,  did  not 
hesitate  to  pronounce  sentence  of  excommunication 

1  Gieseler,  i.,  385,  395,  396;   Schaff,  iii.,  313. 

2  Matt,  xvi.,  19;  xviii.,  18;  i  Cor.  v.,  3-5;  2  Cor.  vi.,  14,  17;  Rom. 
xvi.,  17;  Gal.  i.,  8,  9;  Tit.  Hi.,  10;  1  Thess.  iii.,  6,  14,  15. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  1 73 


against  the  heretics,  Pelagius  and  his  pupil  Ccelestius.1 
Thus  the  right  of  universal  censure  grew  and  Rome 
came  to  have  her  own  officers  to  execute  the  law. 

8.  From  the  fifth  century  onward  the  title  of  "  papa  " 
or  "pope"  was  unvaryingly  used  by  the  bishops  of  ,. 
Rome.  This  title  is  an  abbreviation  of  the  words ^ 
"pater  patrum" — father  of  fathers — and  was  at 
first  given  as  a  title  of  respect  to  ecclesiastics  generally. 
In  the  Eastern  churches  it  has  continued  to  the  present 
day,  and  in  the  Roman  Church  the  general  use  of 
"father"  may  be  regarded  as  the  continuation  of  a 
variation  of  the  original  word.  The  next  step  in  the 
early  Church  was  the  restriction  of  the  term  "papa" 
as  a  special  title  for  bishops.  By  the  fourth  century  it 
had  been  gradually  reserved  for  the  metropolitans  and 
patriarchs.  After  the  fifth  century  it  was  claimed 
and  borne  as  the  badge  of  the  supreme  rank  of  the 
successor  of  St.  Peter  among  the  churches  of  Christen- 
dom. Not  until  1073,  however,  did  Gregory  VII.  t 
formally  prohibit  the  assumption  of  the  title  by  other 
ecclesiastics.  This  unique  transfer  of  a  distinction 
first  from  all  to  a  few,  and  then  from  a  few  to  one, 
indicates  a  concentration  of  rank,  dignity,  and  power 
in  the  one  thus  distinguished.  A  term,  originally 
one  of  filial  respect  and  reverence,  becomes  one  of  au- 
thority.    The  name  and  the  office  react  on  each  other. 

9.  The  letters  of  the  Roman  bishops  gradually  came 
to  be  regarded  in  the  Western  Church  as  apostolic 
ordinances,  and  laid  the  foundation  for  the  vast 
ecclesiastical  legal  system.2  Siricius  (384-398)  wrote 
the  first  decretal  which  had  the  force  of  law.  3     A  typical 

1  Hard.,  Concil.,  i.,  1025. 

2  Gieseler,  i.,  382;  Milman,  i.,  129. 

3  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  68. 


1 74     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


illustration  of  the  character  and  power  of  papal  letters 
is  seen  in  the  commanding  communication  of  Pope 
Celestine  sent  in  428  to  the  bishops  of  Vienne  and 
Narbonne  concerning  ceremonial  abuses  in  their  pro- 
vinces. "  Inasmuch,"  he  wrote,  "  as  I  am  appointed  by- 
God  to  watch  over  the  whole  Church,  it  is  my  duty 
everywhere  to  root  out  evil  practices  and  to  substitute 
good  ones;  for  my  pastoral  superintendence  is  re- 
strained by  no  bounds,  but  extends  to  all  places  where 
the  name  of  Christ  is  known  and  adored."1  The 
Gallic  churches  received  this  pronouncement  without 
a  whisper  of  disapproval.  The  Council  of  Chalcedon 
(451)  accepted  a  letter  from  Leo  I.,  settling  a  disputed 
point  in  theology.2  Gelasius  I.  (494)  instructed 
Emperor  Anastasius  on  the  superiority  of  the  spiritual 
over  the  temporal  power.3  The  decretals  of  Gregory 
the  Great  spoke  with  a  bold,  undisputed  authority.4 

10.  The  Edict  of  Milan  in  313  did  not  make  Christi- 
anity the  state  religion,  but  merely  put  it  on  a  legal 
equality  with  paganism.  It  was  not  long,  however, 
until  this  new  status  enabled  Christianity  to  outstrip  its 
old  rival  and  actually  become  the  constitutional  faith. 
State  patronage  prepared  the  way  for  a  conscious  and 
natural  adaptation  and  assimilation  of  forms  of  im- 
perial polity.  Accordingly  the  admonition  of  the  early 
period  assumed  the  tone  of  mandates;  interferences, 
whether  for  advice  or  arbitration,  took  the  character 
of  appeals,  rescripts,  and  ordinances ;  and  the  model  of 
discipline  and  ritual  for  all  churches  emanated  from 
Rome. 

»  Bower,  i.,  383. 

2  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  2d  ser.,  xii.,  70,  Letter  43. 

3  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  72. 
*  Ibid.,  73. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  175 


11.  Constantine,  fully  aware  of  the  pre-eminence  and 
power  of  the  Roman  Church,  took  special  pains  to 
bestow  upon  it  his  imperial  munificence.  The  Bishop 
of  Rome  was  transferred  from  a  humble  dwelling 
to  a  spacious  palace,  possibly  to  the  Lateran,  owned 
to  this  day  by  the  Pope.  Confiscated  property  was 
restored  and  money  donated.  Splendid  churches  were 
erected. l  With  grateful  hearts  the  Christians  gladly 
accepted  the  sovereignty  of  the  Emperor.  As  Roman 
citizens  there  was  no  conception  in  their  minds  of  the 
spiritual  government  of  the  Church  independent  of 
the  imperial  power.  When  Constantine  called  councils 
like  Aries  and  Nicasa,  heard  appeals,  made  appoint- 
ments, and  legislated  for  the  Church  it  was  all  accepted 
as  a  matter  of  course.  The  Church  of  Rome  gained  ob- 
viously more  than  any  other  spiritual  body-corporate  of 
the  Christian  world.  This  advantage,  coupled  with  the 
wide-reaching  claims  set  forth  for  at  least  two  centuries, 
carried  her  by  a  mighty  leap  far  above  all  other  churches 
and  made  her  head,  in  theory  and  fact,  if  not  in  name, 
the  Pope.  Thus  all  the  contentions  of  the  Petrine  claim 
of  ecclesiastical  government  fell  into  a  natural  harmony 
with  the  plans  of  the  Empire.  The  rise  of  provincial 
churches  corresponded  to  the  provincial  system  of  the 
Empire.  The  elevation  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  a 
primacy  over  all  churches  created  a  counterpart  to  the 
Emperor.  The  union  of  the  Empire  and  Papacy  was  not 
only  easy  and  natural' — it  was  inevitable. 

1 2.  No  sooner  did  the  Church  rise  from  persecution  to 
a  great  world  power  than  the  necessity  was  felt  every- 
where of  some  central  authority  to  preserve  its  unity. 
The  divisions  in  the  Arian  controversy  clearly  revealed 

«  Lateran,  Vatican,  St.  Paul,  St.  Agnes,  St.  Lawrence,  and  St. 
Marcellinus. 


176     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


that  need.  The  Emperor,  in  a  way,  sought  to  meet 
the  requirement,  but,  when  he  failed,  he  called  the 
Council  of  Nicasa  to  serve  that  end.  A  universal 
council  might  be  of  great  service  in  a  crisis  but  it  could 
not  easily  be  in  perpetual  session.  The  Roman  Church 
saw  its  chance  at  this  juncture  and  embraced  every 
opportunity  to  pose  as  the  supreme  unifying  power  in 
Christendom.  It  was  a  long  and  not  always  an  easy 
struggle,  but  the  effort  was  at  length  successful.  It  was 
not  long  after  the  day  of  Constantme  that  it  may  be 
said  that  the  Church  had  gained  control  of  the  Empire. 
That  conquest  gave  the  Church  an  unprecedented 
pre-eminence.  In  this  movement  the  Church  of 
Rome  played  the  leading  role.  The  next  great  problem 
was  to  enable  the  Pope  to  get  control  of  the  Church 
and  in  this  way  wield  absolute  sway  over  the  Christian- 
ised Empire,  or,  to  state  it  the  other  way,  over  the 
imperialised  Church.  _> 

Nothing  seems  clearer,  after  taking  into  account  all 
the  factors,  than  that  the  rise  of  papal  power  was  a 
natural,  logical,  historical  process  which  began  with  the 
planting  of  the  Church  in  Rome.  Numerous  incidents 
mark  the  differem  stages  of  development  to  show 
that  every  new  assumption  of  papal  prerogative  was 
disputed  and  contested.  Indeed  nothing  more  dis- 
tinctly marks  the  growth  of  papal  authority  than  the 
fact  that  these  protests  were  so  numerous  and  so  widely 
scattered. 

In  the  beginnings  of  ecclesiastical  organisation  bishops 
enjoyed  and  exercised  an  equality  of  power  and  rank. 
The  persistence  of  this  idea  may  be  seen  long  after 
the  period  of  Constantine.  But  hierarchical  tendencies 
began  very  early  and  are  very  conspicuous  in  con- 
nection with  Rome.     In  the  opening  decades  of  the 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  177 


history  of  the  Church  it  was  customary  for  Christians 
eminent  in  station  or  piety  to  address  letters,  advisory 
or  hortatory,  to  other  churches  on  general  points  of 
creed  or  discipline,  or  on  special  local  questions.  Thus 
wrote  Clement  of  Rome,  Polycarp,  Ignatius,  and  others. 
Not  infrequently  churches  appealed  to  prominent 
bishops  for  assistance  and  advice.  Often  one  bishop 
would  censure  another  for  the  manifestation  of  unwar- 
ranted assumptions.  Thus  Irenasus  reprehended  Victor 
for  excommunicating  the  heretical  bishops  of  Asia 
and  did  it  as  an  equal. 1  Tertullian,  after  he  joined 
the  heretical  Montanists,  scornfully  denies  the  powers 
claimed  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome  by  asking,  "How 
comes  it  that  you  take  to  yourself  the  attribute  of 
the  Catholic  Church?"  He  answers  by  denying  the 
whole  Petrine  theory.2  Hippolytus,  Bishop  of  Pontus, 
in  a  controversy  with  Calixtus  I.,  shows  how  the  claim 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was  denied  in  the  beginning  of  the 
third  century.  3  Urigen  also  repudiated  the  Petrine 
claims.4  While  the  great  Cyprian  did  so  much  to 
create  the  concept  of  the  one  Catholic  Church  under 
the  leadership  of  Rome,  vet,  at  the  same  time,  he 
strongly  asserted  episcopal  equality  and  independence.5 
This  important  historical  fact  must  never  be  for- 
gotten in  considering  the  rise  of  the  Papacy,  namely,  &H.ee**£^  P 
that  the  change  was  not  directly  from  democracy  to  °^L^X^  ' 
monarchy,  but  from  democracy  indirectly  through 
oligarchy  to  monarchy.  In  addition  to  the  instances 
of  episcopal  equality  and  independence  already  given, 

1  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  v.,  24. 

1  On  Modesty,  in  Lib.  of  Ante-Nic.  Fathers,  xviii. 

3  Hippolytus,  Refutation  of  Heresies,  ix.,  7. 

*  Greenwood,  i.,  109. 

s  Ibid.,  121  ff. 


178     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  Apostolic  Canons  in  canon  35  ordered  each  province 
to  determine  for  itself  which  one  of  its  churches  should 
hold  the  primacy.  This  idea  persisted  long  after  the 
time  of  Constantine  and,  indeed,  the  Council  of  Antioch 
in  341  repeats  the  rule  as  if  recognising  a  long  estab- 
lished regulation.  The  Council  of  Nicaea  in  325,  while 
assigning  the  highest  rank  to  the  Apostolic  Sees  of 
Rome,  Alexandria,  and  Antioch,  at  the  same  time 
reserved  to  every  province  the  rights  of  its  own  church. 
In  the  second  universal  council  held  in  381  at  Constan- 
tinople, when  the  great  provinces  of  the  Church 
were  defined  and  the  honourable  primacy  of  Rome 
clearly  asserted,  no  interference  was  allowed  with  the 
autonomy  of  the  provincial  churches. 

In  the  West,  however,  local  autonomy  and  provincial 
primacy  were  not  so  much  emphasised  as  in  the  East. 
Rome  and  St.  Peter's  successor  residing  there  early 
established  a  predominance  over  Spain,  Gaul,  and 
Britain.  In  Africa,  Carthage  for  the  most  part 
obeyed  Rome,  and  in  Italy,  Ravenna  and  Milan  occa- 
sionally showed  stubborn  resistance. 

1 3 .  The  civil  government  naturally  approved  a  system 
of  Church  polity  which  was  in  harmony  with  that 
of  the  state.  It  is  no  surprise,  therefore,  that  imperial 
edicts  supported  the  lofty  position  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome. *  Did  he  not  represent  the  Church  of  the 
great  Empire  and  the  faith  of  the  Emperor  himself? 
Besides  it  was  always  easiest  to  deal  with  him  as  a  re- 
presentative of  the  entire  Church.  In  fact  there  was  a 
sentiment  in  the  Church  that  it  was  much  better  to  carry 
on  all  business  with  imperial  authorities  through  him. 
To  this  end  the  Council  of  Sardica  in  347  decreed  that 
all  prelates  visiting  Rome  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining 

«  Boyd,  W.  K.,  Ecclcs.  Edicts  of  the  Theodos.  Code,  N.  Y.,  1906. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  179 


civic  favours  should  present  their  petitions  through 
the  Bishop  of  Rome.  *  Theodosius  (380)  commanded 
that  all  subjects  "should  hold  that  faith  which  the 
divine  Peter,  the  Apostle,  delivered  to  the  Roman 
Bishop."2  Valentinian  III.  (445)  commanded  all 
bishops  to  recognise  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as  their 
leader  in  both  judicial  and  administrative  matters.3 
Later  Emperors  lavished  on  the  Roman  Church  wealth, 
immunities,  and  exemptions  which  greatly  enhanced 
its  power  and  magnified  the  importance  of  its  head.* 
Justinian,  in  a  decree  of  532,  declared  that  he  had 
been  very  diligent  in  subjecting  all  the  clergy  of  the 
East  to  the  Roman  See.  He  also  expressed  a  firm 
resolution  never  to  allow  any  business  affecting  the 
general  welfare  of  the  Church  to  be  transacted,  without 
notifying  the  head  of  all  the  churches.5  Such  a  positive 
and  sweeping  assertion  by  such  a  powerful  ruler  shows 
the  height  to  which  papal  power  had  climbed  by 
the  sixth  century.  Pope  John  II.  was  highly  pleased 
with  the  useful  acknowledgment  of  Justinian,  compli- 
mented him  on  his  "perfect  acquaintance  with  ecclesias- 
tical law  and  discipline,"  and  added:  "preserving  the 
reverence  due  the  Roman  See,  you  have  subjected  all 
things  unto  her,  and  reduced  all  churches  to  that 
unity  which  dwelleth  in  her  alone,  to  whom  the  Lord, 
through  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  did  delegate  all 
power;  .  .  .  and  that  the  Apostolic  See  is  in 
verity  the  head  of  all  churches,  both  the  rules  of  the 
fathers  and  the  statutes  of  the  princes  do  manifestly 

»  Can.  9.     Later  the  same  procedure  was  adopted  at  Constanti- 
nople. 

2  Cod.  Theod.,  c.  16. 

3  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  72. 

4  Greenwood,  i.,  324. 

4  Cod.  Justin.,  i.,  tit.  2. 


8o    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


declare,  and  the  same  is  now  witnessed  by  your  impe- 
rial piety."1 

The  emancipation  of  the  Church  and  the  great 
inflow  of  wealth  and  pagan  converts  wrought  a  woeful 
change  in  its  character  and  habits.  A  heathen  historian 
declared  that  candidates  would  stoop  to  any  means 
to  secure  the  pontifical  office  because  "the  successful 
candidate  gains  the  opportunity  of  fattening  upon  the 
oblations  of  matrons;  of  being  conveyed  about  in 
stall-carriages ;  of  appearing  in  public  in  costly  dresses ; 
of  giving  banquets  so  profuse  as  to  surpass  even  royal 
entertainments."2  The  Fathers  of  the  Church  like 
Hilary,  Jerome,  and  Basil  deplored  the  vices,  thus 
rebuked,  in  terms  of  even  greater  severity. 

1 4.  The  barbarian  invasions  on  the  whole  strengthened 
both  the  spiritual  and  temporal  supremacy  of  the  Holy 
See.  They  gave  the  death  blow  to  paganism  in  Rome.  3 
Once  converted  to  Roman  Christianity,  the  Germans 
became  the  staunch  supporters  of  the  papal  hierarchy 
and  enabled  the  Pope  to  enforce  his  prerogatives  in  the 
West.4  Backed  by  these  sturdy  Teutons,  the  Pope  be- 
came the  most  powerful  individual  in  Christendom  and 
soon  declared  his  independence  of  the  Byzantine  court. 

1 5 .  Another  factor  of  no  small  moment  was  the  ex- 
traordinary ability  of  some  of  the  successors  of  St. 
Peter.  Among  them  were  men  of  commanding  leader- 
ship, men  of  brains  and  faith,  fearless  administrators, 
aggressive  judges,  and  men  conscious  of  the  tremendous 
part  the  Papacy  was  destined  to  play  in  the  world's 
history.     Conscious  of  their  own  power,  and  standing 

»  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  ii.,  137. 

2  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  lib.  xxvii.,  c.  3. 

1  Gieseler,  i.,  219;  Schaff,  iii.,  68,  69. 

*  Hutton,  W.  H.,  The  Church  and  the  Barbarians,  N.  Y.,  1906. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  181 


on  their  lofty  assumptions,  they  took  advantage  of 
every  condition  and  circumstance  to  increase  their 
authority  and  prerogatives.  Thus  the  office  of  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  continually  grew  in  power  and  juris- 
diction. Julian  I.  (337-352),  the  supporter  of  Atha- 
nasius,  held  lofty  ideas  of  his  power  as  Pope1  and  gave 
his  famous  decision  on  the  eucharist  in  the  Council 
of  Sardica  (343). 2  Damascus  (366-384), a  staunch  de- 
fender of  orthodoxy  and  champion  of  celibacy,  insisted 
on  the  recognition  of  his  jurisdiction  over  East  Illyri- 
cum,  and,  as  a  warm  friend  of  Jerome,  established  the 
authority  of  the  Vulgate. 3  Siricius  (385-398)  upheld 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Holy  See  and  issued  the  first 
decretal  now  extant.4  In  legislating  about  discipline 
and  abuses  in  the  Spanish  Church  his  words  were 
intended  to  convey  universal  authority  on  baptism, 
marriage,  and  celibacy.  Speaking  in  conscious  virtue 
of  the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See  he  said:  "We 
bear  the  burdens  of  all  that  are  heavy  laden;  nay, 
rather  the  blessed  Apostle  Peter  bears  them  in  us, 
who,  as  we  trust,  in  all  things  protects  and  guards 
us,  the  heirs  of  his  administration." 

Innocent  I.  (402-417)  accepted,  as  a  matter  of 
unquestioned  right,  all  that  had  been  claimed  by  his 
predecessors,  and  surpassed  all  of  them  by  the  wide 
range  of  his  pretensions.  He  sought  to  obliterate  all 
distinction  between  advice  and  command.  He  spoke 
in  a  dogmatic  and  imperative  tone  on  all  questions 
pertaining  to  doctrine,  discipline,  and  government 
in  the  Church  of  the  West.  "It  is  notorious  to  all  the 
world,"  he  said,  "that  no  one  save  St.  Peter  and  his 

J  Apolog.  contra  Arian,  21-26;  Euseb.,  Soc,  and  Soz. 

2  Smith  and  Wace,  iii.,  532. 

3  Ibid.,  i.,  783.  *  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  68. 


182     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


successors  have  instituted  bishops  and  founded  churches 
in  all  the  Gauls,  in  Spain,  Africa,  Sicily,  and  the  adja- 
cent islands."1  Nor  did  the  West  deny  the  mater- 
nity of  Rome.  Consequently  he  asserted  complete 
jurisdiction  over  Illyria,  assumed  that  the  African 
churches  were  dependent  upon  the  See  of  Rome, 
formulated  fourteen  rules  for  the  Gallic  bishops, 
settled  controversies  in  Spain,  and  manifested  a  lofty 
attitude  toward  the  churches  of  the  East.  He  played 
a  prominent  part  in  repelling  the  attacks  of  the  bar- 
barians on  Rome. 2  He  was  the  first  to  claim  a  general 
prerogative,  as  "the  one  single  fountain-head  which 
fertilises  the  whole  world  by  its  manifold  streamlets," 
to  revise  the  judgment  of  provincial  synods3  and  thus 
to  legislate  by  his  own  fiat  for  the  whole  Church.  As 
the  great  guardian  of  orthodoxy,  he  condemned 
Pelagius  and  excommunicated  him.  "Unstained  in 
life,  able  and  resolute,  with  a  full  appreciation  of  the 
dignity  and  prerogatives  of  his  see,  he  lost  no  oppor- 
tunity of  asserting  its  claims ;  and  under  him  the  idea 
of  universal  papal  supremacy,  though  as  yet  somewhat 
shadowy,  appears  already  to  be  taking  form." 

"The  first  Pope  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word" 
was  Leo  I.,  called  the  Great  (440-461).  "  In  him 
the  idea  of  the  Papacy  .  .  .  became  flesh  and 
blood.  He  conceived  it  in  great  energy  and  clearness, 
and  carried  it  out  with  the  Roman  spirit  of  dominion 
so  far  as  the  circumstance  of  the  time  at  all  allowed."4 


1  Hard.,  Condi.,  i.,  995. 

1  Milman,  i.,  143,  4. 

J  1st  Epist.,  ii.,  ch.  3;  Lea,  Studies  in  Ch.  Hist.,  133;  Hard., 
Concil.,  i.,  1025. 

*  Smith  and  Wace,  iii.,  652 ;  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  xii. ;  Greenwood, 
i.,  bk.  2,  ch.  4-6;  Milman,  i.,  bk.  2,  ch.  4;  Schaff,  iii.,  314. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  183 


Before  his  elevation  to  the  Papacy  in  440  very  little 
is  known  about  Leo.  His  place  of  birth,  nationality, 
and  early  education  are  all  shrouded  in  obscurity.  For 
ten  years  prior  to  his  election,  Leo  was  perhaps  the  most 
proxi  inent  man  in  Rome  and  noted  for  hi?  learning 
and  piety.  While  absent  on  a  civil  mission  in  Gaul, 
he  was  chosen  Pope.  At  that  time  the  Empire  was 
in  a  very  weak  condition.  Women,  surrounded  by 
their  court  of  eunuchs  and  parasites,  ruled  at  Constanti- 
nople and  Ravenna.  Barbarians  were  pressing  in 
from  all  sides.  Heresies  rent  the  East  and  ignorance 
was  fast  covering  the  West.  Western  Christendom 
must  be  consolidated  and  disciplined  so  that  it  could 
meet  the  crudeness  and  heresy  of  the  powerful  invaders 
and  overcome  both.  The  See  of  St.  Peter  must  re- 
place the  tottering  imperial  power.  The  law  of  Rome 
must  once  more  be  obeyed  over  the  Empire,  but  this 
time  as  the  ecclesiastical  law.  Leo  was  the  only  great 
man  in  Church  or  state,  so  the  burden  was  thrust 
upon  his  shoulders. 

Leo  possessed  those  qualifications  which  made  him  the 
master  spirit  of  his  age  and  the  Founder  of  the 
mediaeval  Papacy."  Lofty  in  his  aims,  severe  and 
pure  in  life,  of  indomitable  courage  and  perseverance, 
inspired  by  a  fanatical  belief  in  the  Petrine  theory, 
uncompromisingly  orthodox,  the  great  first  theologian 
in  the  Roman  Chair,  he  made  the  first  clear-cut  ex- 
position of  the  extreme  limits  and  prerogatives  of  the 
mediaeval  Papacy.1  He  asserted  and  exercised  the 
superabounding  power  of  the  Pope  to  regulate  every 

«  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Source-Book  of  Med.  Hist.,  No.  35. 
Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  2d  ser.,  xii.,  contains  his  life  and 
letters.  See  sermon  by  Leo  I.  on  Peter's  leadership  in  Robinson, 
Readings,  i.,  69;  Orr,  Source  Book,  §  10. 


1 84     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


department  of  Church  government  without  any  human 
limitations.  Driven  on  by  a  dream  of  the  universal 
dominion  of  Rome  and  Christianity,  a  great  orator 
who  swayed  the  Romans  at  will,  he  acted  as  a  resolute 
Christian  monarch  conscious  of  his  divine  mission. 
Possessed  of  a  capacity  for  complex  rule,  an  extra- 
ordinary organiser  and  administrator,  he  used  all  his 
ability  to  make  Christianity  and  the  Papacy  the  one 
great  world  power.  Twice  he  saved  Rome  from  the 
barbarians,  once  in  452  when  Attila,  King  of  the  Huns, 
was  persuaded  to  withdraw  without  attacking  the  city, 
and  again  in  455  when  the  Vandal  leader,  Genseric, 
was  induced  to  spare  the  capital  from  fire  and  murder. 
He  drove  heresy  out  of  Italy  and  suppressed  it  in 
Spain.  He  forced  the  African  Christians  to  submit  to 
his  authority  (443),  regained  the  papal  power  lost 
in  East  Illy ria,  compelled  the  Gallic  bishops  to  obey 
his  mandates,1  and  even  asserted  his  supremacy 
over  the  Eastern  Church.  Through  a  legate  he  pre- 
sided over  the  fourth  ecumenical  Council  of  Chalcedon, 
guided  its  theological  discussions,  and  was  ''the 
finisher  of  the  true  doctrine  of  the  presence  of  Christ." 
Pope  Leo  laid  the  greatest  possible  emphasis  upon 
the  fact  that  there  is  one  God,  one  Church,  one  universal 
bishop,  one  faith,  and  one  interpreter  of  that  faith, 
and  that  the  recognition  of  this  basic  fact  alone  could 
bring  unity  and  efficiency  to  Christendom.  He  very 
wisely  cultivated  a  close  alliance  with  the  state  and 
secured  from  Valentinian  III.  the  promulgation  of  an 
imperial  edict  in  445,  which  raised  him  to  the  exalted 
position  of  "spiritual  director  and  governor"  of  the 

1  Hilary,  Archbishop  of  Aries,  was  excommunicated  and  Emperor 
Valentinian  III.  was  induced  to  uphold  the  action.  Greenwood,. 
i-.  35i  ff- 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  185 


Universal  Chureh.  Thus  the  Pope  would  issue  hjs 
laws  for  the  Church,  just  as  the  Emperor  did  for  the 
Empire. 

After  Leo  the  Great,  who  died  in  461,  no  important 
Pope  filled  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter  until  the  time  of  Greg- 
ory I.,  called  the  Great  (590-604).  If  Leo  drew 
the  outline  of  the  mediaeval  Papacy,  Gregory  made 
it  a  living  power.  He  issued  the  first  declaration  of 
independence  and  assumed  actual  jurisdiction  over  the 
whole  Western  Church.  His  high  ideal  was  completely 
realised  so  that  even  Gibbon  calls  his  pontificate  the 
most  edifying  period  of  Church  history. 1 

Gregory  I.  was  born  at  Rome  in  540  of  a  rich,  pious, 
senatorial  family.  His  great-grandfather  was  Pope 
Felix  II.  (483-492).  His  father  was  a  wealthy  lawyer 
and  senator.  His  mother  and  two  aunts  were  canon- 
ised. He  was  very  well  educated  for  that  period  as  a 
"saint  among  the  saints"  as  John  the  Deacpn,  his 
biographer,  declared.  In  grammar,  rhetoric,  and  logic 
he  was  second  to  none  in  Rome.2  He  studied  law 
preparatory  to  public  life  and  was  well  versed  in  the 
inspiring  history  of  Rome  and  in  current  events. 
At  thirty  he  was  a  distinguished  senator  and  three 
years  later  Emperor  Justin  II.  made  him  Praetor  of 
Rome. 

From  his  mother  Gregory  inherited  a  profound  re- 
ligious temperament,  hence  he  naturally  became  im- 
bued with  the  ascetic  religious  ideas  of  the  age.  The 
monastic  crusade  of  the  West,  nowat  its  height,  found 

'  Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fall,  iv.,  421;  Niqene  and,  Potf-Nicene 
Fathers,  2d  ser.,  xii.,  contains  Gregory's  letters  and'  sermons; 
Gregory  of  Tours;  Bede;  Snow,  St.  Gregory  the  Great;  Barmby, 
Gregory  the  Great;  Hutton,  Church  of  the  Sixth  (Sentury;  Neander,  iii., 
112;  Hallam,  328. 

1  Gregory  of  Tours,  x.,  1. 


1 86     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


him  a  willing  convert.  Upon  his  father's  death, 
Gregory  used  his  vast  wealth  for  charity  and  for 
founding  seven  monasteries.  Persuaded  by  his  pious 
mother,  he  himself  became  a  monk  in  575.  Selling 
all  his  costly  furniture,  fine  clothes,  and  jewels  for  the 
poor,  he  turned  his  own  house  into  a  monastery  and 
almost  killed  himself  by  his  vigorous  fasts  and  ascetic 
vigils.  Soon  he  gained  great  fame  as  a  monk,  was 
chosen  abbot,  founded  six  monasteries  in  Sicily  and 
enforced  a  tyrannical  discipline. 1 

Gregory  was  a  man  of  too  great  ability,  however,  to 
be  penned  up  in  a  monastery;  consequently  Pope 
Benedict  called  him  to  his  court  as  one  of  the  seven 
deacons  of  Rome.  In  579  he  was  sent,  as  a  papal  nun- 
cio, to  Constantinople  to  reconcile  the  Emperor  and  the 
Pope  and  to  unite  the  Eastern  and  Western  churches, 
while  at  the  same  time  he  was  instructed  to  solicit 
military  aid  against  the  troublesome  Lombards. 
For  six  years  he  remained  at  Constantinople  on  this 
mission  and  gained  much  fame  as  a  theologian  and 
diplomat.  Although  he  failed  to  reunite  the  two 
branches  of  the  Christian  Church,  he  did  bring  about 
an  amicable  understanding  between  the  Pope  and  the 
Emperor  and  got  some  help  against  the  Lombards. 
In  a  discussion  with  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople 
over  the  nature  of  the  body  after  resurrection,  Gregory 
won  a  signal  victory.  During  his  stay  in  the  East  he 
wrote  his  renowned  work  Magna  M  or  alia.  In  585  he 
returned    to    Rome,    resumed    his    duties    as    abbot, 

1  Soon  many  poetical  tales  were  imputed  to  him.  It  was  said 
a  new  stomach  was  given  him  so  he  could  fast.  An  angel  visited 
him  disguised  as  a  sailor.  Milman,  ii.,  45.  Read  Bede  for  the 
story  which  led  to  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxons.  For 
his  treatment  of  the  monk  Justus  see  Milman,  i.,  432.  Cf. 
Montalembert,  ii.,  84-87;  Diet.  Christ.  Biog.,  ii.,  779. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  187 


became  a  popular  preacher,  and  was  recognised  gen- 
erally as  the  most  able  man  in  the  Church. 

When  Pope  Pelagius  II.  died  in  590,  the  western 
part  of  Europe  was  in  a  very  critical  condition.  The 
Teutonic  barbarians  had  overrun  the  Empire  from 
England  around  to  Constantinople,  destroying  or 
burying  nearly  all  that  was  best  in  the  civilisation  of 
old  Rome.  Justinian,  to  be  sure,  had  recaptured 
Rome  in  556,  and  it  was  to  remain  nominally  under 
imperial  rule  until  the  time  of  Charles  the  Great  (800) , 
but  the  Emperor's  hold  on  the  West  was  limited  and 
precarious.  His  representative,  the  exarch,  lived 
mostly  at  Ravenna.  The  Pope,  however,  acknow- 
ledged the  sovereignty  of  the  Emperor  both  in  theory 
and  practice.  As  a  result  of  the  weakness  and  inac- 
tivity of  the  exarch,  nearly  all  Italy  lay  prostrate 
before  the  fierce  Lombards,  and  no  efficient  help  came 
from  the  East. 

The  city  of  Rome  was  in  a  miserable  condition. 
The  Tiber  had  overflowed  its  banks  and  had  swept 
away  the  granaries  of  corn,  thus  entailing  famine 
and  starvation.  A  dreadful  pestilence  had  swept  away 
thousands,  among  them  the  Pope  himself.  In  a  letter, 
Gregory  compared  the  Roman  See  to  an  old  shattered 
ship,  letting  in  the  waves  on  all  sides,  tossed  by  daily 
storms,  its  planks  rotten  and  gnawed  by  rats — almost  a 
wreck ! 1  An  imperial  organisation  was  needed  to  give 
Latin-Teutonic  Europe  the  highest  type  of  an  organ- 
ised, Christian  civilisation  under  one  law  and  one  faith, 
and  thus  to  preserve  for  future  generations  the  best 
that  was  in  old  Greece  and  Rome,  as  well  as  the  best 
that  was  in  the  Germans.     "  It  is  impossible  to  conceive 

*  Epistle  v.  in  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  xii.,  74. 


The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


what  had  been  the  confusion,  the  lawlessness,  the 
chaotic  state  of  the  Middle  Ages,  without  the  mediaeval 
Papacy." 1  A  man  of  heart,  power,  and  lofty  purpose 
-—a  ruler  who  saw  the  opportunity  and  need  of  the 
Christian  Church  in  Western  Europe,  who  felt  her  new 
impulses,  and  who  could  guide  her  through  a  crucial 
period  to  a  great  and  useful  career' — such  a  man  the 
Roman  senate,  clergy,  and  people  believed  that  they 
had  found  in  the  monk  Gregory.  He  alone  could  save 
them  from  Teutonic  anarchy,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
from  Roman  decay  on  the  other. 

Although  elected  Pope  unanimously  by  the  senate, 
clergy,  and  people  of  Rome,  Gregory  did  not  want 
the  office.  He  felt  unworthy  of  it  and  feared  its  duties 
might  lure  him  to  worldliness — hence  he  fled  the  city 
and  wrote  the  Emperor  beseeching  him  not  to  confirm 
the  election.  But  the  Roman  prefect  intercepted  the 
letter  and  sent  instead  a  petition  urging  the  confirma- 
tion. Gregory  was  captured  at  last  and  forcibly 
consecrated  Supreme  Pontiff.  He  was  the  best  qualified 
man  in  all  Christendom  for  the  place.  He  represented 
the  best  in  Rome  and  the  best  in  Christianity.  His 
comprehensive  policy,  his  grasp  of  fundamental  issues, 
his  political  training,  his  capacity  for  details,  made 
him  the  man  for  the  hour.  He  merged  the  office 
of  Roman  Emperor  and  Christian  bishop  into  essen- 
tially one  and  thus  became  the  real  founder  of  the 
mediaeval  Papacy.  His  pontificate,  therefore,  was  an 
\era  in  the  history  of  the  Church. 

Gregory's  policy  was  to  uphold  and  extend  the 
Petrine  theory  to  the  utmost,  although  personally 
refusing  the  title  of  "  Universal  Bishop."     He  censured 

1  Milman,  ii.,  44. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  189 


the  ambitious  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  for  assuming 
that  title  and  wrote  to  John  of  Syracuse:  "With 
regard  to  the  church  of  Constantinople,  who  doubts 
that  it  is  subject  to  the  Apostolic  See  ?  .  .  .  The 
Apostolic  See  is  the  head  of  all  churches."1  To  the 
Patriarch  of  Alexandria  he  wrote:  "In  the  preface 
of  the  epistle  .  .  .  you  have  thought  fit  to  make 
use  of  a  proud  title,  calling  me  Universal  Pope.  But 
I  beg  your  most  sweet  Holiness  to  do  this  no  more."2 
Again  he  exclaimed :  ' '  Whoever  calls  himself  Universal 
Bishop  is  Antichrist. "  3  Gregory  meant  to  exercise 
as  much  autonomy  as  possible  in  ruling  the  West 
but,  at  the  same  time,  to  submit  to  imperial  authority 
in  all  instances  of  conflicting  claims.4  He  planned  to 
unify  and  purify  the  Church  and  to  extend  Christianity 
over  the  known  world. 

Under  Gregory's  able  management  papal  power  was 
consolidated  and  made  supreme  in  Western  Europe. 
He  systematised  papal  theology,  and  perfected  and 
beautified  the  Church  liturgy  until  it  took  three  hours 
to  celebrate  the  mass.*  He  regulated  the  calendar  of 
festivals.  He  checked  heresies  by  driving  Manichasism 
and  Arianism  out  of  Italy,  Spain,  and  Gaul,  and  even 
advised  the  persecution  of  African  Donatists  (591). 
The  Jews,  however,  were  tolerated  and  efforts  made  to 
convert  them.      To  get  rid  of  simony  he  personally 

1  Ep.,  ix.,  12;  xiii.,  45. 

2  Ep.,  viii.,  30;  ix.,  12. 

3  Milman,  ii.,  72;  Ep.,  vii.,  31. 

4  Milman,  ii.,  81. 

5  He  created  the  Gregorian  chant,  instituted  singing  schools, 
minutely  described  the  ceremonies,  prescribed  the  variety  and 
change  of  garments,  and  laid  down  the  order  of  processions.  The 
duties  of  priests  and  deacons  were  outlined  and  their  parishes 
defined. 


190    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


refused  all  presents  and  abolished  all  fees  in  his  court. 
From  priest  to  bishop  he  corrected  the  clergy  and  urged 
upon  them  celibacy. 1  He  restored  discipline  through- 
out the  Church  and  patronised  all  sorts  of  charity. 
He  fought  paganism  fiercely  by  denouncing  the  Roman 
classics  and  even  boasting  of  his  own  ignorance  of 
them,2  while  at  the  same  time  he  sent  missionaries  over 
most  all  of  Western  Europe.  Monasticism,  which  he 
himself  had  adopted  with  all  his  heart,  he  encouraged 
and  improved  by  restoring  the  early  rigid  discipline; 
by  separating  monks  and  clergy;  by  restricting  ad- 
mission to  religious  houses  to  persons  above  the  age 
of  eighteen  years;  by  insisting  on  a  probation  of  two 
years;  by  condemning  deserters  to  life  imprisonment; 
and  by  favouring  the  Benedictine  Rule  as  the  model. 
The  papal  court  was  reorganised,  and  clergy  were 
substituted  for  boys  and  secular  adults  to  attend  the 
Pope.  Even  some  efforts  were  made  to  check  the 
European  slave-trade. 

In  administrative  power  Gregory  was  perhaps  inferior 
to  Leo  I.  The  Church  was  very  wealthy,  owning  lands 
by  this  time  all  over  Western  Europe  and  in  Africa. 
The  Pope  had  to  rule  these  vast  estates  as  a  mighty 
landlord.  Subdeacons  were  his  agents.  Tenants  were 
controlled  politically  as  well  as  religiously.  The 
surplus  income  was  given  to  the  clergy,  papal  domestics, 
monasteries,  churches,  cemeteries,  almshouses,  and 
hospitals.  On  the  first  of  every  month  he  distributed 
to  the  poor  corn,  wine,  cheese,  vegetables,  oil,  fish, 
meat,  clothes,  and  money.  The  country  was  full  of 
tramps  and  poor  clergy;  these  he  provided  for  and 
also    supported    impoverished    nobles.  3     His    letters 

»  Ep.,  iii.,  34,  50.  2  Ep.,  xi.,  54. 

s  It  was  also  reported  that  he  fed  3000  virgins. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  191 


are  full  of  items  about  law-suits,  disputes  over 
weights  and  measures,  collection  of  rents,  emancipation 
of  slaves,  marriage  of  tenants,  produce  accounts,  and  a 
multitude  of  other  affairs. 

In  addition  to  these  multitudinous  duties,  he  was 
virtual  King  of  Italy.  He  denounced  the  corrupt 
exarch  and  drilled  the  Romans  for  military  defence, 
though  he  always  laboured  for  peace.  He  held  the 
haughty  Lombards  in  check  and  converted  them  to 
Christianity.  He  extended  his  authority  over  Africa, 
Spain,  Gaul,  England,  and  Ireland  and  even  claimed 
jurisdiction  over  the  East.  He  was  the  first  Pope  to 
become  in  act  and  in  influence,  if  not  in  name,  the 
temporal  sovereign  of  the  West.  He  paved  the  way 
for  Hildebrand  and  Innocent  III.      A' 

In  culture  Gregory  was  a  true  son  of  an  age  of 
credulity  and  superstition.     He  believed  all  the  current 
tales  about  ghosts,  miracles,  and  supernatural  manifest- 
\A  ations.     The  linen  of  St.  Paul  and  his  bondage-chains, 
he  declared  genuine  and  possessed  of  miracle-working 
j  power. l     To  the  converted  Visigothic  King  in  Spain 
1  he  sent  a  key  made  from  Peter's  chain,  a  piece  of  the 
1  true  cross,  and  some  hairs  from  the  head  of  John  the 
1  Baptist.      Indeed  this  was  a  practice  which  he  fol- 
,  lowed  in  the  case  of   many  of  his   friends  whom  he 
desired  to  especially   favour.2     The  "monuments  of 
classic   genius"    he    despised,   asserting   that    it   was 
his   wish   to   be   unknown    in  this   world   and   glori- 
fied  in   the   next.      He   very  severely   censured    the 
profane  learning  of  a  bishop  who  taught  grammar, 
studied    the    Latin    poets,    and    pronounced   Jupiter 
and  Christ   in   the    same    breath.      It    was  his  con- 

1  Epistle  xxx.  in  Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fathers,  xii.,  154. 

2  Ibid.,  82,  130,  243. 


192     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


stant  habit,  on  the  other  hand,  to  enforce  upon 
all  Christians  —  clergy  and  laity  alike  —  the  great 
duty  of  reading  the  Bible.  Still  his  own  literary 
work  was  rather  voluminous.  He  wrote  850  letters 
— more  than  all  his  69  predecessors  together — on  all 
topics  and  to  all  Christendom.  In  addition  he  pro- 
duced his  Magna  M  or  alia,  x  some  homilies,  a  book  on 
pastoral  rule,  and  liturgical  treatises.  His  productions 
are  below  mediocrity  and  he  cannot  compare  with 
Leo  I.  as  a  critic,  expositor,  or  original  thinker.  He 
had  but  a  slight  knowledge  of  Greek  and  knew  no  He- 
brew, nor  did  he  possess  a  deep  acquaintance  with  the 
Church  Fathers.  Yet  for  that  age  he  was  a  cultured 
man  and  enjoyed  a  high  reputation  for  piety  and  learn- 
ing, and  spoke  to  unborn  generations. 

"By  his  writings  and  the  fame  of  his  personal  sanc- 
tity, by  the  conversion  of  England  and  the  introduc- 
tion of  an  impressive  ritual,  Gregory  the  Great  did 
more  than  any  other  Pontiff  to  advance  Rome's  ecclesi- 
astical authority."2  His  virtues  and  faults,  his  sim- 
plicity and  cunning,  his  pride  and  humility,  his  ig- 
norance and  his  learning' — all  were  suited  to  the  times 
and  made  him  "the  greatest  of  all  the  early  Popes."3 
He  closes  the  period  of  the  Church  Fathers  and  opens 
the  Middle  Ages.  For  150  years  there  were  no  material 
acquisitions  of  ecclesiastical  power,  hence  the  history 
of  the  Papacy  becomes  very  uninteresting  and  com- 
paratively unimportant.4 

When  Gregory  the  Great  closed  his  remarkable 
career  (604)  the  Papacy  of  the  Middle  Ages  had  been 

>  This  was  an  exposition  of  the  Book  of  Job,  Ep.  49. 

2  Bryce,  150. 

3  Adams,  Civ.  of  M.  A.,  230. 

4  Hallam,  329. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  193 


born  and  in  form  resembled  the  Empire.  l  The  head 
of  the  Church  was  known  as  "Pope."  Because  of 
his  peculiar  personal  holiness  he  could  be  judged 
by  none,2  though  himself  judge  of  all.  The  hier- 
archy of  officers  had  been  practically  completed.  3 
The  laity  was  distinctly  cut  off  from  the  clergy,  and 
deprived  of  powers  exercised  in  the  first  and  second 
centuries.  The  election  of  the  clergy  had  changed 
from  a  democratic  to  an  aristocratic  process.  There 
was  a  marked  evolution  in  rites  and  ceremonies. 
Art  and  music  were  now  employed.  The  mass  gradu- 
ally became  the  powerful,  mysterious  centre  of  all  wor- 
ship, while  public  worship  became  imposing,  dramatic, 
theatrical.  Festivals  were  multiplied  almost  without 
number.  The  worship  of  martyrs  and  saints4  became 
so  widespread  and  popular  that  a  "calendar  of  saints" 
was  formed.  Pilgrimages  grew  to  be  very  numerous  and 
the  use  of  relics5  developed  such  a  craze  tha,t  the 
fathers,  councils,  Popes,  and  at  last  the  Emperor 
L  himself  sought  to  check  it.  Religious  pageants  were 
multiplied  and  the  use  of  images  and  pictures  of  saints 
were  encouraged  in  the  churches.  The  Virgin  Mary 
was  exalted  to  the  eminence  of  divinity.  In  imitation 
of  the  court-calendar,  loftier  titles  of  spiritual  dignity 
were  adopted  or  invented  for  the  higher  ecclesiastics. 
The  dogma  of  the  "unity  of  outward  representation" 

1  Gieseler,  i.,  382;  Milman,  i.,  128. 

2  Hefele,  iii.,  20.  In  the  early  Church  "pope,"  or  "papa"  or 
"abba,"  was  applied  to  all  clergy.  Schaff,  iii.,  300.  "Pope"  is 
still  used  for  all  priests  in  the  Greek  Church  and  "father"  in  the 
Latin  Church.     See  Cyprian,  Ep.,  viii.,  1. 

3  Stewards,  secretaries,  nurses,  and  undertakers  were  regarded 
as  being  in  a  sense  members  of  the  lower  clergy.      Schaff,  iii.,  262. 

*  For  biblical  authority  see  Luke  xv.,  10;  Rev.  viii.,  3,  4. 
*S   s  Began  in  the  second  century. 
13 


i94     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


had  acquired  not  merely  a  material  and  visible,  but  also 
a  sacramental,  character.  Thus  the  Church  was  the 
only  channel  of  spiritual  graces,  hence  union  with  the 
Church  was  absolutely  indispensable  to  salvation. 
The  Church  had  become  immensely  wealthy  in  lands, 
buildings,  and  furniture.  This  corrupting  familiarity 
with  secular  affairs  was  early  seen  and  denounced.  St. 
Chrysostom  sharply  rebuked  the  bishops  who  "had 
fallen  to  the  condition  of  land-stewards,  hucksters, 
brokers,  publicans,  and  pay-clerks."  The  Council  of 
Chalcedon  ordered  the  bishops  to  appoint  land-stewards, 
to  look  after  their  estates. 1 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

i. — New  Testament. 

2. — New  Testament  Apocrypha. 

3. — Church  Fathers.     See  Chap.  X. 

4. — Acts  of  the  Councils.     See  Chap.  IX. 

5. — Roman  Civil  Law.  Various  English  trans- 
lations. 

6. — Canon  Law.  Various  collections.  Best  by 
Richter,  2  vols.,  Leip.  1839.  No  English 
translation. 

7. — Apostolical  Constitutions.  Various  English 
translations.  Best  in  Ante-Nic.  Christ.  Lib., 
vol.  1 7  Cf.  Harnack,  Sources  of  the  Apostolic 
Canons.     Lond.,  1895. 

8. — Apostolic  Canons.  Various  English  trans- 
lations. 

9. — Leo  I.,  Epistles  to  Flavian.     Transl.  by  C. 
A.   Heurtley.     Oxf.,   1885.     Letters  and  Ser- 
mons.    Lib.  of  Nic.   and  Post-Nic.   Fathers, 
xii. 
10. — Gregory    I.,     Book    of    Pastoral    Rule    and 

Selected  Epistles.     Ibid. 
Bibliographical    note: — Unfortunately    the    best 
collections  of  materials   have   not  been  put 

1  Hard.,  ConciL,  ii.,  612. 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  195 


into  English,  like:  i.— Mirbt,  Quellen  zur 
Geschichte  des  Papsttum.  Leipz.,  1895.  2. — 
Hardouin,  Acta  Conciliorum.  Paris,  181 5.  12 
vols.  3. — Mansi,  Collectio  Sacrorum  Con- 
ciliorum.     Flor.  &  Ven.,   i759~98-  31   vols- 

4. Jaffe,    Regesta    Pontificum    Romanorum. 

Leipz.,   1 881-8.     2   vols. 

B.— SECONDARY: 

1. — special: 

1. — Allies,  T.  W.,  The  Holy  See  from  Leo  I.  to 

Gregory  I.     Lond.,  1888. 
2 . — Balzani,  U. ,  Early  Chronicles  of  Italy.     Lond. , 

1883;  i.-iii. 
3.— Barry,  W.,   The  Papal  Monarchy.     N.    Y., 

1 90 1. 
4< Bigg,     Church's    Task    under    the    Roman 

Empire.     Oxf.,  1905. 
5. — Borrow,  I.,  The  Pope's  Supremacy.     New  ed. 

Lond.,  1859. 
6. — Bower,    A.,    History    of   the    Popes.     Phil., 

1844.     3  vols. 
7. Bright,   W.,  The  Roman  See  in  the  Early 

Church.     Lond.,  1890. 
8. — Brock,  M.,  Rome:  Pagan  and  Papal.     Lond., 

1883. 
9 — Bryce,  J.,  The  Holy  Roman  Empire.     Many 

eds.     Last  ed.     Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  1904. 
IO> — Creighton,  M.,  History  of  the  Papacy.     Bost., 

1882-94.     Vol.  i. 
1 1 .  — Dudden,  Gregory  the  Great.     Lond.  and  N.  Y. , 

1905.     2  vols. 
12.— Duff,  D.,  The  Early  Church.     N.  Y.,  1891. 
I3# — Gasquet,  A  Life  of  Pope  Gregory  the  Great. 

Lond.,  1904. 
14. — Gore,  C,  Leo  the  Great.     Lond.,  1878. 
I5- — Gosselin,  J.  E.,    Power  of  the  Pope  during 

the  Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1853. 
16. — Greenwood,     T.,      Cathedra    Petri.     Lond., 

1859-72.     Vols,  i.-ii. 
17. — Hussey,  R.,  Rise  of  the  Papal  Power.     Lond., 

1863. 
18.— Kellett,  F.  W.,  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  and 

his  Relations  with  Gaul.     N.  Y.,  1890. 


196      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


19. — Kenrick,  F.  P.,  The  Primacy  of  the  Apostolic 

See.     7th  ed.     Bait.,  1855. 
20. — Lea,  H.  C,  Studies  in  Church  History.     Phil., 

1883. 
21. — Legge,  A.  0.,  Growth  of  the  Temporal  Power 

of  the  Papacy.     Lond.,  1870. 
22. — Littledale,  R.  F.,  The  Petrine  Claims.    Lond., 

1889. 
23. — Mann,  H.  K.,  Lives  of  the  Popes  in  the  Early 

Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1906. 
24. — Manning,  H.  E.,  The  Temporal  Power  of  the 

Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ.     N.  Y.,  1880. 
25. — Meyrick,    T.,    Lives    of    the    Early    Popes. 

Lond.,  1878-80.     2  vols. 
26. — Milman,  H.  H.,  Latin  Christianity.     Lond., 

1840.     Several  revisions. 
27. — Murphy,  The  Chair  of  Peter.     Lond.,  1888. 
28. — Pennington,   A.   R.,  Epochs  of  the  Papacy. 

Lond.,  1881.     Ch.  1. 
29. — Platnia,  B.,  Lives  of  the  Popes.     Lond.,  1893. 
30. — Rainy,  R.,  The  Ancient  Catholic  Church  (to 

45i)- 
31. — Riddle,  J.  E.,  History  of  the  Papacy.     Lond., 

1854. 
32. — Rivington,   L.,   The  Roman  Primacy   (430- 

451).     Lond.,  1899. 
33. — Snow,  T.  B.,  St.  Gregory  the  Great.     Lond., 

1892. 
34. — Soechi,    B.,   Lives  of   the  Popes   to   Gregory 

VII.     Lond.,  1888. 
35. — Tardini,    C,    The   Popes   of   Rome   and   the 
Popes  of  the  Oriental  Churches.     Lond.,  187 1. 
Ch.  4. 
36. — Wilkes,  G.  A.  T.,  History  of  the  Popes  from 
Linus  to  Pius  IX.     Lond.,  1851. 
11. — general: 

Adams,  Civ.,  ch.  4.  Adeney,  ch.  11.  Allies, 
Peter's  Rock,  vol.  iv.,  ch.  32-34,  38,  42,  47.  Alzog, 
i.,  §  87,  130.  Butler,  ch.  44,  50.  Cheetham,  ch.  9, 
§4.  Coxe,  Lect.  3,  §  23.  Crooks,  ch.  28.  Darras, 
i.-ii.  Dollinger,  ii.,  ch.  5.  Duff,  63,  108,  249, 
341,  557,  605.  Fisher,  105-108,  157-160.  Fitz- 
gerald, i.,  235-264;  ii.,  1-28.  Foulkes,  105,  328, 
348,   368,  382.      Gieseler,  i.,  §  68,  69,  91-94.     Gil- 


Rise  of  the  Papacy  197 


128- 


martin,  I,  ch.  21.  Gregorovius,  i.  Hasea  § 
130.  Hurst,  L,  325  /f.  Kurtz,  L,  264-274.  Mahan, 
bk.  3,  ch.  4.  Milman,  bk.  1,  2.  Milner,  ii.,  cent. 
4,  ch.  17;  cent.  6,  ch.  5-8.  Moeller,  i.,  34Q-355- 
Neander  i.,  §  2;  ii.,  §  2.  Robertson,  bk.  2,  ch.  6, 
p.  303.  Schaff,  pd.  2,  ch.  4,  §  5°-53;  Pd-  3»  ch.  3» 
§26;  ch.  5,  §60-64;  pd.  4,  ch.  4. 


V 


CHAPTER  XI 

MONASTICISM 

Outline:  I. — Importance  of  the  institution  of  monasticism. 
II. — Antecedents  and  analogies.  III. — Causes  of  the  origin  of 
Christian  monasticism.  IV. — Evolution  of  Christian  monasticism. 
V. — Spread  of  group  monasticism  from  the  East  to  the  West. 
VI. — Development  of  monasticism  in  Western  Europe.  VII. — 
Opposition  to  monasticism.  VIII. — Result  and  influences  of 
monasticism.     IX. — Sources. 


M' 


ONASTICISM,  the  story  of  which  is  one  of  the 
strangest  problems  in  Church  history  and  is 
enshrouded  in  legend,  originated  outside  the 
Church,  but  soon  became  the  dominant  factor  in  the 
Church.  It  was  not  the  product  of  Christianity  so 
much  as  an  inheritance — an  adopted  child.  It  sup- 
ported the  orthodox  faith,1  upheld  the  papal  theory, 
monopolised  ecclesiastical  offices,  helped  to  mould 
the  Church  constitution,  and  supplied  the  great 
standing  army  of  the  Popes.  It  was  a  determining 
factor  in  European  civilisation.  The  monk  was  the 
ideal  man  of  the  Middle  Ages.  He  stood  for  the  highest 
morality  and  best  culture  of  that  period.  As  a  mis- 
sionary he  planted  the  Church  over  Western  Europe. 
He  stood  between  the  laity  and  the  hierarchy,  as 
the  friend  of  the  former  and  the  champion  of  the  latter. 
He  created  the  system  of  public  charity  and  had  a 
marked  influence  on  industry  and  agriculture.     Before 

1  Jerome,  Ep.,  15. 

198 


Monasticism  199 


long  a  monk  sat  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter  and  sought 
fo  rule  the  Church.  The  first  series  of  great  ecclesiasti- 
cal reforms  was  produced  by  the  hermits  in  the  fourth 
century,  the  Benedictines  in  the  sixth,  the  Clugniacs  in  - 
the  eleventh,  and  the  Begging  Orders  in  the  thirteenth. 
Monasticism,  therefore,  was  a  very  important  institu- 
tion in  the  rise  of  the  Church. 

Monasticism  originated  in  antiquity  and  was  based 

—  ~  -  hi  '  m 

pn  a  general  principle  broader  than  any  creecL     it 
grew  out  of  that  mystical  longing  for  an  uninterrupted 
"inner  enjoyment  ot  the  soul — out  ot  a  passion  for, 
"brooding,  and  out  of  an  abnormal  view  of  the  seclusion^ 
necessary  for  the  cultivation  nf  thp  t.rnp..rp1ipimlp  lift^ 
which  would  save  the  soulfrom  sin.     It  was  simply 
an  effort  to  explain  the  riddle  of  existence  and  to 
comprehend  the  true  relations  of  God,  man,  and  the 
world.     Every    great    religion    has    expressed    itself 
in  some  form  of  monasticism.     Centuries  before  Jesus 
there  were  monks  and  crowded  convents  among  th^ 
Hindoos.     The  sacred  writings  ot  the  ancient  Hindoos 
(2400  B.C.)   reveal  many  legends  about  holy  hermits,  ^ 
and  give~ascetic  rules.1     Buddha,   who  founded  his 
faith   possibly   six   centuries    B.C.,    enjoined   celibacy^ 
on  his  priests.2     Alexander  the  Great  tound  monasti- 
cism flourishing  in  the  East.     In  Greece  the  ' '  Pagan  ^ 
Jesuits,"  the  PythagoreansT  were  a  kind  of  ascetic  order.3 
Plato,  with  his  powerful  appeal  for  the  ideal  life.,  had 
a  marked  influence  upon  the  ascetic  views  of  the  early 
Christians,  and  Neo-Platonism  became  a  positive  force 

1  The  Hindoo  monks  exhausted  their  minds  in  devising  means  of 
self-torture. 

2  Lea,  Sac.  Celib.,  24;  Laws  of  Manu,  bk.  6.,  st.  1-22.     See  Hardy, 
Eastern  Monasticism,  Lond.,  1850. 

3  'The  disciples  of  Pythagoras  were  called   cenobites^      Monta- 
lembert,  i.,  215. 


2oo     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


in  Christendom  during  the  third  and  fnnrt.1i  frpnt.nripg 
The  priestesses  of  Delphic  Apollo.  Achaian  Juno.  an^T 
Scythian  Diana  were  virgins.1  In  Tudea  the  and  en  ^ 
Nazarites2  afford  an_example.  The  Essenes  seem  to 
be_the  direct  forerunners  of  Christian  monasticism.3 
In  addition  there  were  conspicuous  individual  examples 
in  Jewish  history  like  that  of  Elisha,  Elijah,  Samuel, 
and  John  the  Baptist.4     In  Rome  the  name  of  vestal 

*  virgin  was  a  proverb.     In  Egypt,  the  priests  of  Serapis 
were  ascetics,5  the  priestesses  of  Ceres  were  separated^. 

»from    their    husbands,^    and    the    Therapeutag    were, 
rigid  monks  who  lived  about  the  time  of  Jesus.7 

These  influences  and  examples,  coupled  with  Platonic 
philosophy,  and  the  interpretation  put  upon  the 
teachings  and  lives  of  Jesus  and  His  Apostles,  produced 
Christian  monasticism.  Jesus  Himself  was  unmarried, 
poor,  and  had  not  "where  to  lay  his  head."  He 
commanded  the  rich  young  man  to  sell  his  property 
Jor  the  poor,8  and  said:  "Take  no  thought  for  the 
morrow  what  ye  shall  eat  and  what  ye  shall  drink, 

m  or    wherewithal    ye    shall    be    clothed."      St.    John 

,  and    probably  other  Apostles  were  celibates.9     The 

1  Lea,  Sac.  Celib.,  24. 

2  N umb .__vi. .1-21^^ 

3  Pliny,  Nat.  Hist.,  v.,  15;  Porphyry,  De  Abstinentia,  iv.,  11; 
Edersheim,  ch.  3 ;  Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew,  ii.,  330.     Seep.  44,45. 

*  Isa.  xxii.,  2;  Dan.  ix.,  3;  Zech.  xiii.,  4;  2  Kings  i.,  8;  iv.,10,  39, 
42.     Cf.  Heb.  xi.,  37,  38;  Expositor,  1893,  i.,  339. 
s  Schaff,  ii.,  390. 

6  Lea,  Sac.  Celib.,  24. 

7  Eusebius,  ii.,   17;  Philo,  Contemp.  Life,  bk.   1;  Jewish  Quart. 
Rev.,  viii.,  155;  Baptist  Rev.,  Jan.,  1882,  p.  36  ff.;  see  Jewish  Encyc.\p 
Dollinger,  ii.,  335.  O; 

8  Matt,  xix.,  21;  Luke  xviii.,  22;  Mark  x.,  21. 

9  Tertullian  held  that  all  the  Apostles  except  Peter  were  un- 
married. 


Monasticism 


Apostles  likewise  taught  that  following  Testis  meant 
'  forsaking   father,   mother,   brethren,   wife,   children,  \ 

houses  and  lands." l      Thexurge^Xhris^ia^  jf 

flie    flesh,    and    disparaged    marriage,2  and  thev  too  ^^^y4^ 
omeless  like  t>lp1"r  Master  3  V&  T&*+  4> 

TJie__surjreme  question  asked  by  earnest  Christians^ 
in  all  ages  has  been  this:  "What  is  the  true,  the 
ideal  Christian  life?"4  At  every  step  of  her  progress 
the  Church  has  given  a  different  answer  to  the  impor- 
tant query.  Yet  in  all  this  divergent  opinion  there 
is  plainly  seen  one  common  conviction.     To  live  in  the_ 


service  of  God,  in  the  religious  denunciation    of   the   ^      C*  ti£ 

world,  and  in  thp  abnegation  of  the  joys  of  life — thpt   7tM*  "V* 

is  the  universal  reply,..,    In  the  early  Church  this  position 

was  very  strongly  emphasised  and  led,  in  consequence, 

to  the  rise  of  monasticism.     Hence  it  may  be  said 

that  the  monastic  ideals  simply  expressed  the  highest 

ideals  of  the  Church,  and  the  history  of  monasticism 

becomes  a  vital  part  of  the  history  of  the  mediaeval 

Church. 

It  must  be  remembered,  too,  that  the  old  belief 
that  the  Church  was  poor,  pure,  and  wholly  spiritual 
juntil  the  time  of  Constantine  is  a  false  tradition. 
The  secularisation  and  materialisation  of  the  Church 
was  so  noticeable  as  to  cause  complaint  as  early  as 
the  third  century.  The  Church  Fathers  unanimously m 
deplore  the  precocious  decay  of  the  Christian  world,  s 
To  the  minds  of  many,  therefore,  the  only  way  to  escape 

«  Mark  x.,  29,  30. 

2  Paul,  especially  1  Cor.  vii.;  Lea,  Sac.  Celib.,  25. 

3  Texts  quoted  as  favourable  to  monasticism:  Acts  ii.,  44;  iv., 
32;  xv.,  28,29;  1  Cor.  vii.,  8;  iv.,  3;  Matt,  xix.,  12,  21;  xxii.,  30; 
Rev.  xiv.,  4;  Luke  xx.,  35;  Mark  x.,  29,  30. 

4  Harnack,  Monasticism,  10. 
'  Montalembert,  i.,  bk.  1. 


*** 


«•    « 


2  02*     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


♦  •** 


41   *«••     % 


the  damning  effects  of  contamination  with  the  Roman 
world,  the  only  way  to  elude  the  evils  in  the  Church 
itself,  and  the  only  sure  way  of  leading  the  ideal 
Christian  life  was  to  flee  from  villages  and  cities  to  the 
mountains  and  deserts.  "They  fled  not  only  from 
the  world,  but  from  the  world  within  the  Church ." 
When  Christianity  was  drawn  from  the  catacombs  to 
the  court  of  the  Caesars,  it  lost  its  power  to  regen- 

erate     souls.       That    memorable     alliance     hindered 

%  — — — *^» 

neither  the  ruin  of  the  Empire,  nor  "the  servitude 
and  mutilation  of  the  Church."  *  Associated  with  the 
power  that  so  long  sought  to  destroy  her,  the  Church 
was  brought  face  to  face  with  the  tremendous  task  of 
transforming  and  replacing  the  Empire.  At  the  same 
time  the  Church  made  a  desperate  attempt,  though 
in  vain,  to  keep  alive  the  spiritual  torches  of  apostolic 
Christianity.  The  solution  of  that  great  problem, 
however,  was  left  to  the  monks. 

The    philosophy    which    prevailed    among    many 
of  the  early  Christians  held  that  the  material  world 

^all^eyil^and  that  the  spiritual  world  is  the  only 
good.     Gnosticism,  whicli^^rmeated) Christendom  in_ 
the  second  century.  declareo^ThaFthe  body  is  thp  spat" 
of  evil  and  hence  that  it  must  be  abused  in  order  to 
purify   the   soul   within.2     Montanism   advocated   an 

• ; "      ^^  — — ^ 

.excessive  Puritanism,  and   prescribed  numerous  fasts 

and  severities,  which  payed   the  wav  for  asceticism. 

•  — — ___*■——  •* 

Other  groups  of  Christian  philosophers  exercised 
similar  influences.3  The  Church  itself  commended 
fasting   and    other    practices    for   the    cultivation    of 

1  Montalembert,  i.,  188. 

2  Lightfoot,  The  Colossian  Heresy. 

3  Marcionites,    Valentinians,  Abstinents,  Apotoctici,  Encratites, 


etc. 


Monasticism  203 


spiritual  benefit.  Celibacy  of  the  clergy  gradually 
became  the  rule.a  As  a  result  the  belief  soon  developed 
that  the  surest  way  to  gain  eternal  joys  in  heaven 
was  to  turn  away  from  the  transitory  pleasures  of 
earth.  Christianity  in  the  first  and  second  centuries 
was  the  gospel  of  renunciation  and  resurrection. 
.The  next  logical  step  was  to  make  the  body  as  miserable 
as  possible  here — sort  of  a  pious  sacrifice — in  order 
to  make  the  soul  happier  hereafter.  To  die  that  one 
might  really  live,  to  find  one's  life  in  losing  it — that 
became  the  supreme  purpose  of  earthly  existence. 
The  most  eminent  of  the  early  Fathers  commended 
asceticism,  particularly  fasting  and  celibacy,  and 
jnany  likewise  practised  it.  It  is  easy  to  feel  that 
..the  air  was  charged  with  ascetic  ideals.  The  lit- 
erature, the  philosophy,  and  the  religion  of  the  day 
all  pointed  out  narrow  paths  that  led  to  holiness. 
As  a  result  there  were  many  ascetics  of  both  sexes, 
although  they  were  bound  by  no  irrevocable  vow.1 
The  persecutions  of  Christians  by  the  Roman 
government  forced  many  to  5gg  tor  sa355  tl  the  deserTs""*1 
and    mountains.2      Thus    Paul    of    Thebes    and    St. 


Anthony  fled  in  the  Decian  persecutions  about  the 
year  250.  When  persecution  ceased,  martyrdom  had 
become  such  a  holy  act,  and  such  a  short,  easy  road 
to  a  sainted,  eternal  life,  that  the  most  devout  resolved 
that  since  they  could  not  die  as  martyrs,  they  would 
at  least  live  as  martyrs.  The  mildness  of  the  climate 
in  Egypt  and  Palestine,  where  the  small  amount,  nf 
food  and  clothing  needed  for  subsistence  was  easily 
procured,  made  those  regions  the  hirthpla.ce  of  monas- 
ticism.    The   growth   of  worldliness   in   the   Church, 

1  Cyprian,  Ep.,  62. 

2  Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist.,  vi.,  42. 


204     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


with  the  increase  of  numbers  and  wealth,  gave  rise 
to  many  cries  for  reform.  The  legalisation  and,  along 
with  it,  the  paganisation  of  the  Church  gave  birth 
to  much  that  was  bitterly  denounced.  The  union 
of  the  Church  and  state  was  the  climax — the  Church 
was  no  longer  the  "bride  of  Christ,"  it  was  held,  but 
the  mistress  of  a  worldly  ruler.  Hence  monasticism 
turned  its  back  not  only  on  the  world  but  alsoon 
the  Church.  To  understand  it,  therefore,  it  must  be 
viewed  as  the  first  great  reformation  in  the  Church — ■ 
a  desire  to  return  to  simple,  pure,  spiritual,  apostolic 
Christianity.1      / 

Christian  monasticism  did  not  begin  at  any  fixed 
time  or  place.  It  was  slowly  evolved  as  a  curious 
mixture  of  heathen,  Tewish,  and  Christian  influences.^ 
The  whole  Church  had  an  ascetic  aspect  during  the 
apostolic  age,  hence  endurance,  hardihood,  and 
constant  self-denial  were  required  of  its  members. 
But  for  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  no  proofs  of  a 
distinct  class  of  ascetics  can  be  found  within  the 
Church,  except,  perhaps,  the  order  of  widows,  devoted 
to  charity,  supported  by  gifts  from  the  faithful,  and 
sanctioned  by  the  Apostles.2  In  the  second  century, 
however,  a  class  of  orthodox  Christians,  who  desired  to 
attain  Christian  perfection,  were  called  "abstinents" 
or  "ascetics."  They  withdrew  from  society  but  not 
from  the  Church,  renounced  marriage  and  property, 
fasted  and  prayed,  and  eagerly  sought  a  martyr's  death.3 
The  belief  that  the  end  of  the  world  was  near  no  doubt 

1  Harnack,  Monasticism,  65. 

2  1  Tim.  v.,  3-14.     Cf.  Acts  ix.,  39,  41. 

3  Justin  Martyr  observed  that  Christians  were  commencing  to 
abstain  from  flesh,  wine,  and  sexual  intercourse.  He,  with  Ignatius 
and  others,  lauds  celibacy  as  the  holiest  state. 


Monasticism  205 


did  much  to  emphasise  the  necessity  of  preparing 
for  the  day  of  judgment.  By  the  third  century  the 
Christian  literature,  philosophy,  and  theology  were 
tinged  with  asceticism.  Cvprian.  Origenr  Hieracus, 
Mp.thnrtins,  Tertullian,  and  others  taught  the  efficacy, 
of  asceticism  in  one  form  or  another  anri  to  snme  extent, 
practised  it  themselves.1  but  always  within  the  Churer^ 
The  heretical  sects  became  still  more  prominent  in  their 
reverence  for  austerities  and  even  outdid  the  orthodox 
in  practice. 2  This  first  stage  of  asceticism  was  neither 
organised,  nor  absolutely  cut  off  from  the  Church. 

The  product  of  this  wide-spread  ascetic  agitation^ 
was  the  creation  of  a  new  type,  namely,  anchoretism, 
or  hermit  life,  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century. 


This  was  the  second  phase  of  monastic  evolution.    It 
appeared  first  in  Egypt  about  the  fourth  century,  where" 
the  physical  conditions  were  most  suitable,  m  the  home 


of  the  Therapeutae  and  Serapis  monks,  the  stronghold" 
of  heresy  and  paganism,  the  birthplace  of  Neo-Platon^ 
ism  amid  a  people  famous  for  fanaticism.     The  Deda/i 
persecution  in   250   was,   apparently,   the  immediate 
occasi on  for  its  birth.  ^Anthony  of  Alexandria,  ancT 
Amnion  were  the  earliest  representatives  of  this  new, 
form  of  asceticism.     Paul  of  Thebes,  however,  is  now 
generally  believed  to  be  a  pious  romance  from  the 
pen  of  Jerome,  but  he  may  still  be  viewer!  as  typical. 

Anthony  (25 1-356),  the  "patriarch  of  the  tnnti|g." 
was  the  real  founder  of  anchoretism.  He  early  sold 
his  estate  for  the  poor,  gave  his  sister  to  a  body  of 

1  Celibacy  was  habitually  practised  by  some;  others  devoted 
their  lives  to  the  poor.  Many  converts  like  Cyprian  sold  their 
possessions  for  the  needy.  Still  others  like  Origen  mutilated 
themselves. 

2  Irenaeus,  Against  Heresy,  i.,  24;  Epiphanius,  Heresy,  23. 


2o6     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


virgins,  and  cut  himself  off  from  the  world  by  retiring 
to  a  desert  in  order  to  devote  his  life  to  spiritual  things. 
He  lived  as  a  strict  hermit  till  a  great  age,  gained  a 
world-wide  fame,  had  many  visitors  seeking  spiritual 
guidance,  and  won  many  converts  to  monasticism. 
Soon  the  wildest  tales  were  told  about  his  divine 
0  powers.  Before  he  died  Egypt  was  full  of  hermits, 
and  some  were  found  in  Palestine.  Athanasius  wrote 
his  biography,  which  was  read  over  all  Christendom 
and  scattered  seeds  of  anchoretism  everywhere — a 
book  which  influenced  the  thought  of  the  age.  Ammon 
Jiad  a  settlement  of  possibly  5000  hermits  at  Mount 
Nitria  in  Lower  Egypt  and  was  almost  as  renowned  as 
Anthony,  his  great  contemporary.1 

The  example,  of  these  illustrious  characters  drew 
thousands  of  both  the  curious  and  the  sincere  to 
Egypt.2  Whole  congregations,  led  by  their  bishops, 
withdrew  to  the  desert  for  salvation^  Priests  fled  from 
the_obligations  of  their  office. 1  By  the  fourth  century 
that  land  wasjull  of  hermits.  Their  life  was  of  a  nega- 
tive character,  founded  on  abstinence  and  bodily  abuse 

B    — a  holy  rivalry  of  self-torture  and  suicidal  austerities. 
-These  practices  mav  be  divideH  ipto  four  classes:  diet.-_ 

m  etic,  sexual,  social,  and  spiritual.^ 

(1)  From  a  dietetic  standpoint  the  hermits  eitfre^ 
fasted,  or  ate  the  simplest  foods,  or  consumed  the  small- 
est quantities.^  Thus  the^  renowned  Isidore  of  Alex- 
andria never  ate  meat,  and  often  at  the  table  would 
if  * 

burst  into  tears  for  shame  at  the  thought  that  he  who 

1  Rufinus,  Concerning  Ascetic  Life,  30;  Socrates,  iv.,  23;  Sozomen, 
i.,  14.     See  Montalembert,  i.,  227. 

2  Augustine,  Confessions,  viii.,  15. 

3  Harnack,  Monasticism,  27. 
«  Ibid.,  47. 


Monasticism  207 


was  destined  to  eat  angel's  food  in  Paradise  should  hav^-  t 
to  eat  the  materia,]  fpod  of  animals.  Macarius  ate  but 
once  a  week.  His  son  lived  three  years  on  five  ounces 
of  bread  a  day  and  seven  years  on  raw  vegetable^. 
Alos  boasted  that  up  to  his  eighteenth  year  he  never 
"ate  bread.  Symeon  ate  but  once  daily  and  in  fast  time 
not  at  alL  Heliodorus  often  fasted  seven  days  at  a  time. 
In  Mesopotamia  a  group  of  hermits  lived  on  grass.  ^ 

(2)  Sexually  the  hermits  believed  either  in  absolute 
virginity  or  in  abstinence^ 

(3)  The  social  and  domestic  vagaries  of  anchoretism 

assumed     many    forms.      The    hermits    fieri     from    the 

society  of  the  world;  deserted  friends  and  family; 
courted  the  company  of  wild  beasts2;  lived  in  caves, 
rlriprl-np  wells,  swamps,  rude  huts,  tombs,  and  on 
the  summits  of  solitary  columns,  or  wanderer!  about 
without  fixer!  homes.  3  A  monk  named  Akepsismas^ 
lived  sixty  years  in  the  same  cell  without  seeing  or 
speaking  to  any  person  and  was  finally  shnr.  for  a  wnjf^ 
.Some  hermits  wore  no  clothing,4  and  thus  exposed  the 
body  to  the  broiling  sun  and  to  biting  insects.  Ma- 
carius, to  atone  for  killing  a  gnat,  lay  naked  six  months 
in  a  swamp  and  was  so  badly  stung  that  he  was  mistaken 
for  a  leper,  s  Others  wore  hair  shirts,  carried  heavy 
weights  suspended  from  the  body,  slept  in  thorn  bushes, 
against  a  pillar,  in  cramped  quarters,  or  deprived  them- 
selves altogether  of  sleep.  Many  never  washed  their 
faces  nor  cared  for  their  hair,  beards,  teeth,  and  nails. 

With  them  filthiness  seemed  to  be  next  to  godliness. 

• 

1  Sozomen,  vi.,  33;  Tillemont,  Mem.,  viii.,  292. 

2  Severus,  Dialogues,  i.,  8. 

3  Evagrius,  Ch.  Hist,  i.,  13,  21;  ii.,  9;  vi.,  22;  Theodosius,  Philoth.t 
■    12,  26;  Nilus,  Letters,  ii.,  114,  115;  Gregory  of  Tours,  viii.,  16. 

4  Augustine,  City  of  God,  i.,  xiv.,  ch.  51. 

5  Tillemont,  Mem.,  viii.,  633. 


2o8     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Anthony  and  Hilarion  scorned  either  to  rut  nv  t.n 
comb  their  hair  except  at  Easter,  or  to  wash  their 
hands  and  faces,  St.  Abraham  never  washed  his  face 
for  fifty  years — yet  his  biographer  proudly  saysr  "His 
face  reflected   the  purity  of  his  soul."     Theodosius. 

like  a  second  Moses,  had  a  stream  r»f  water  burst  from 

0  m 

arock  that  his  thirsty  monks  might  drink,  One  wicked^ 
fellow,  overcome  by  a  pitiable  weakness  for  cleanliness, 
took  a  bath,  when,  lo !  the  stream  dried  upL  Thereupon 
the  frightened  and  repentant  monks  promised  never 
to  insult  heaven  by  using  water  for  that  purpose  again, 
and  after  a  year  of  waiting  a  second  miracle  gave  them 
a  fresh  supply. 

(4)  A  sincere  desire  for  spiritual  improvement  gx^ 
pressed  itself  in  various  practices.  Prayer  was  per- 
haps the  most  common  means  to  that  end,  and  it  was 

*  believed  that  number  and  duration  counted  the  most. 
Paul  the  Simple  repeated  three  hundred  prayers  a  dav_ 

_and  counted  them  with  pebbles.  A  certain  famous  vir- 
gin added  four  hundred  to  that  number  daily.  Some 
spent  all  day  and  others  all  night  in  prayer.     Med_- 

'  itation  and  contemplation  were  generally  employed. 
Preaching  and  singing  were  common  forms  of  religious 
activity .  Studying  and  writing  engaged  those  of  a 
more  scholarly  bent  of  mind. 

Out  of  this  unorganised  anchoretism  there  ptp.wl 
by  the  latter  part  of  the  third  century,  a  orn^0  f^t-™  _ 
of  group  monasticism.  This  was  the  third  stage  in 
the  progress  of  monastic  life^  Such  renowned  hermits 
as  St.  Anthony  in  Upper  Egypt,  Ammon  at  Mount 
Nitria,  Joannes  in  Thebaid,  Macarius  in  the  Scetische 
Desert,  and  Hilarion  in  the  Gaza  Desert  each  had  a 
coterie  of  imitators  imbued  with  a  common  purpose 
and  with  a  profound  respect  for  their  leader^  hut  no 


Monasticism  209 


uniform  rules  governed  them  at  first,,.  As  time  passed, 
however,  the  necessity  of  regulating  the  various  rela- 
tions of  so  many  became  apparent. i  The  organisations 
of_  the__Essenes  an(j  Tt^rppP"tlrP  rnQY  Myp  s^-ved  as  __ 

'models.     At  Mount    Nitria   the   monks   by   common 
arrangement  lived  in  separate  cells,  but  had  a  dining 
room  and  a  chapel  for  all..*     Pachomius  (282-346).  a. 
converted  heathen  soldier,  of  little  education,  n,  p11p'1> 
of  Palsemon  for  twelve  years,  created  the  first  monastic 
rule  and  organised  at  Tabenna  on  the  ISfil^  the  first,^ 
monastic  congregation  (322),  while  his  sister  formed. 

*the  first  convent  at  Tabenisi.  _  This  first  walled 
monastery  had  many  cells  built  to  accommodate  three 

"monks  in  each.  Membership  was  guarded  by  three 
years'  probation  on  severe  discipline.  The  monks 
met  in  silence  for  one  daily  meal  and  wore  white  hoods 
so  as  not  to  see  each  other.  They  prayed  thirty-six 
times  daily,  worked  with  their  hands  indoors  and  out, 
and  wore  over  their  linen  underclothes  white  goat 
skins  day  and  night.  They  were  ruled  by  "priors" 
chosen  on  merit  from  the  twenty-four  classes  of  monks. 3 
At  the  head  of  the  whole  system  stood  an  abbot.4 
When  Pachomius  died  (^46)  he  had  established  nine 
cloisters  "with  3600  monks.  He  called  them  all 
together  twice  a  year,  and  paid  them  annual  visits. 
By  400  the  monks  numbered  50,000. 5  The  great 
Athanasius  visited  Tabenna  to  inspect  the  system 
and  to  study  the  operation  of  this  epoch-making  rule. 

1  The  rule  of  St.  Oriesis  is  little  more  than  a  mystical  praise  of 
asceticism. 

2  Socrates,  iv.,  23;  Sozomen,  i.,  14. 

3  Gwatkin,  Arianism. 
*  Sozomen,  iii.,  14. 

s  Hergenrother,  452. 


2io     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


From  Tabenna  organised  monastidsm  spread  over 
Egypt  and  then  to  nearly  every  province  in  the  Roman 
Empire  by  the  end  of  the  fourth  century.  *_  In  the^ 
Holy  Land  laboured  Hilarion, 2  Epiphanius,  3  Hesycas,* 
the  Bethlehem  brothers,  5  Ammonius, 6  Silvanus,  andT 
Zacharias.  Terome,  the  celebrated  Church  Father, 
with  Paula,  a  rich  Roman  widow,  left  Rome  for  the 
East.  Af£gr  studying  monasticism  in  Egypt  thev 
located  at  Bethlehem  (386).  There  Jerome  studied 
the  Scriptures  and  ruled  a  large  crowd  of  monks,  while 
Paula  became  the  head  of  a  convent  for  girls.  Melania 
built  a  convent  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  and  rulea 
fifty  virgins  (375).  Goddana  and  Elias  laboured  on 
the  lower  Jordan.  _" 

In  Asia  Minor  laboured,  conspicuous  among  many, 
Eustathius    who    first   prescribed    a   monastic    dresg^ 
Basil  the  Great  (c.  379)  who  originated  the  mona.st.io 
vow, '  the  tamous  Nilus  (c.  430).  and  the  HtH  hprmit. 
Marcus  (c.43i)._  Syria  was  renowned  for  at  least  a  dozen 
hermits,   the  most  celebrated   being  bimeon   btylites' 
(c.  459) ,8  the  pillar  saint.     From  Egypt  and  Asia  the" 
^institution  spread  to  Greece  and  became  quite  generaT" 
by  the  fourth  century.     The  most  famous  cloister  was 
that  of  Studium  (460)  at  Constantinople.     The  islands 
of  the  Adriatic  and  Tuscan  Sea  were  soon  coverec 
monasteries  swarming  with  monks. 9 


1  Theod.,  Hist.  Rel.,  30;  Augustine,  De  Mor.  Eccl.,  i.,  31. 

2  Sozomen,  iii.,  14;  vi.,  32. 

3  A  follower  of  Hilarion.     Made  bishop  of  Cyprus  in  367. 
1  Sozomen,  vi.,  32. 

5  Ibid.,  vi.,  32. 

6  Eusebius,  viii.,  13;  Socrates,  iv.,  36;  Sozomen,  vi.,  38. 

7  Sozomen,  vi.,  32. 

*  Theodoret,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ch.  26. 

9  Smith,  Rise  of  Christ.  Monast.,  48. 


Monasticism  211 


The  fourth  and  most  important  step  is  found  in  the 
development  of  the  institution  in  western  Europe. 

Athanasius,  a  hero  and  oracle  to  the  Western  Church, 
_on  a  tour  to  Rome  in  340.  carried  with  him  from  Egypt 
two  specimens  of  hermits. 1  His  Life  of  Anthony  was 
soon  translated  into  Latin.  The  West  had  already" 
heard  about  the  institution,  and  many  individuals 
had  visited  the  most  celebrated  hermits  in  Egypt. 
After  340  many  men  and  women  began  to  give  enthusi- 
astic  support  to  the  new  institution.  Eusebius  (c.  3  70) 
lived  by  rule  with  his  clergy  iinrW  nnP  rr.r.f  at,  VercelU" 
in  northern  Italy. 2  Ambrose  fostered  it  in  and  around 
Milan.3  ,  Paul  of  Nola  (c.  411)  lived  in  Campagna. 
.Conspicuous  examples  were  found  among  the  Roman 
virgins  and  widows.  *  Marcella  in  Rome  turned 
her  palace  into  a  convent.  s_  Paula  and  her  whole 
family  lived  as  ascetics.  The  widow  Lea  was  an  active 
worker. 6  Melania  devoted  her  fortune  to  the  cause. 
Many  of  the  nobles  of  Rome  likewise  became  converts 
to  the    new    idea.7,    Jerome  and  Rufinus  were  con- 

. — . —  »       y        _ 

spicuous  examples  of  those  devotees  who  by  precept 
and  practice  soon  popularised  monasticism  throughout 
Italy.     Convents  for  both  sexes  were  soon  founded. 8 


From  Rome  Augustine  carried  the  institution  back 
to  north-western  Africa.  When  Cassian  (c.  448)  left 
Egypt  and  planted  two  monasteries  at  Marseilles,  he" 

'  Augustine,  De  Mor.  Eccl.,  p.  33.     He  had  been  in  Gaul  in  337 
and  338. 

2  Ambrose,  Letters,  63,  66. 

3  Augustine,  Confessions,  viii.,  15. 

4  Montalembert,  i.,  291-300. 

5  Jerome,  Letter  127. 

6  Jerome,  Letter  23. 

7  Montalembert,  i.,  291;  Jerome,  Letter  26. 

8  Jerome,  Letter  96. 


2i2     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


found  monks  already  in  %hpp,.  Martin t  the  Bishop 
of  Tours,  turned  his  episcopal  palace  into  a  monastery 
and,  at  his  death  (400)  2000  monks  followed  him  to  the 
gravej_  Poitiers.  Lvons.  and  Treves,  together  with 
the  bordering  mountains,  were  soon  scenes  of  monastic 
'  activity.  Donatus,  an  African  monk,  earlv  carried 
the  new  faith  to  Spain  where  it  soon  became  so  popular 
that  by  380  a  synod,  forbade  priests  dressing  as  monks. 
Athanasms.  who  lived  at  Treves  as  an  exile,  probably 
introduced  it  into  Germany.  _  The_British  Isles  had  a 
'Nourishing  system  long  before  the  mission  of  Augustine. 
By  the  fifth  century,  therefore,  monasticism  had  been 
firmly  planted  over  all  western  Europe. 2 

Although  western  monasticism  was  an  offspring  of 
the  eastern  type,  yet  the  child  differed  much  from  the  _ 
parent.     Anchoretism  gained  but  little  foothold  in  t.Vip^ 


West  because  of  climatic  and  ethnic  differences.  The 
group  type  was  dominant  in  the  West,  and  extremes 
and  excesses  were  absent.  No  pillar  saints  and  other 
conspicuous  fanatics  were  found  there.3  Western 
monasticism  was  a  more  practical  system,  an  economic 
factor,  a  powerful  missionary  machine,  an  educational 
agency,  and  the  pioneer  of  civilisation.  It  was  not 
a  negative  force,  but  very  aggressive  and  made  history. 
It  led  all  the  great  reform  movements.  It  was  uniform 
in  spirit,  though  widely  divergent  in  form.  In  some 
cases  monks  were  under  abbots  each  with  his  own 
rule;  others  had  no  fixed  abode — and  many  of  them 
were  tramps  of  the  worst  description,  living  on  their 

1  Sulpic#  Severus,  Life  of  St.  Martin. 

2  See  Ozanam,  Hist,  of  Civ.  in  the  5th  Cent. 

»  Mosheim.  bk.  ii..  cent.  5,  part  2,  ch.  3,  §12,  tells  of  a  German 
fanatic  who  builta  pillar  near  Treves  and  attempted  to  lirntaFe 
''the  career  ot  Simeon  Stylites,  but  tne  neignoounng  bishops  puileci 
it  down. 


Monasticism  213 


holy  calling.  *  Jerome,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  and  many 
other  Fathers  have  left  sufficient  complaints  about  the 
growing  monastic  disorders.  The  need  of  a  common 
rule,  therefore,  was  generally  felt  in  order  to  unify 
the  highly  varied,  and  in  part  highly  doubtful  forms 
of  monasticism. 

Early  efforts  were  made  to  meet  that,  need.     Jerome, 
translated  the  rule  of  Pachomius  into  Latin  and  it  was. 
used  in  parts  of  Italy.     Rufinus  brought  the  rule,  of     t 
Basil  the  Great  to  Rome  and  it  w^s  adopted  in  smither^ 

'TtalvjmH  in  Paid.  .   Tllf  TT1p   nf   Manarinc   wag  o|  Ipasr.^ 

known  in  the  West._  Cassian  (c.  aaS)  was  the  first.  „ 
however,  to  write  out  for  the  cruder  western  institution 
adetailed  constitution  (c.  420V.     He  had  studied  mon-" 
asticism  in  Egypt  and  drew  up  a  very  complete  rule- 
which  covered  all  the  essential  phases  of  cloister  life*^ 
It  was  used  in  many  cloisters  till  the  ninth  century. 
During  this  early  unorganised  period  Popes,  councils, 
and  even  secular  powers  often  tried  to  control  and 
regulate  monasticism. 

The  great  organiser  and  unifier  of  western  monasti- 
cism,  however,  was  St.  Benedict  (d.  543),  "the  patriarchy 
of  the  monks  of  the  west."  2  Born  of  rich  parents  at"a 
_Nursia  in  480.  he  was  sent  to  Rome  to_mmp1ftte  his 
education.  There  he  became  disgusted  with  the  vice 
about  him,  fled  from  college,  family,  and  fortune,  and 
at  the  age  of  sixteen,  retired  to  a  cave  at  Subiaco  thirty 
miles  from  Rome.  He  became  a  severe  ascetic,  wore 
a  hair  shirt  and  a  monk's  dress  of  skins,  rolled  in  beds 
of  thistles  to  subdue  the  flesh,  and  chose  to  be  ignorant 
and  holy  rather  than  educated  and  wicked.  His 
fame    soon    attracted    disciples    and    he    established 

"  Cassian,  Inst.,  ii.,  2;  St.  Benedict,  Rule,  ch.  1;  Jerome,  Ep.,  95. 
2  Gregory  I.,  Dialogues,  bk.  ii.     See  Montalembert,  i.,  bk.  4. 


2i4     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


twelve  monasteries,  with  a  dozen  monks  and  a  superior 
in  each,  but  all  under  his  own  supervision.  Later 
he  left  Subiaco  and  went  to  Monte  Cassino  where 
he  spent  the  closing  years  of  his  remarkable  career. 
Monte  Cassino  became  the  capital  of  western 
monasticism. 

To  control  his  monks  Benedict  drew  up  in  520  the^ 
"Holy  Rule,"  1  which  became  the  basis  fnr  all  western 
monastic  orders  and  was  a  rival  of  St.  Basil's  rule 
in  the  East.  The  "Holv  Rule"  was  thp  product  of^ 
Benedict's  own  sad  experience  as  hermit,  cenobite,  and 
superior,  and  also  of  his  observations  concerning 
the  monastic  laxness  which  he  saw  on  all  hands. 
It  consists  of  a  prologue  and  chapters  on  seventy- three 
governmental,  social,  moral,  liturgical,  and  penal 
subjects^  The  whole  spirit  and  aim  of  tjip.  "RhIr  were, 
constructive  and  reformatory .m  It  provided  for  an 
organisation  monarchial  at  the  top  and  democratic  at 
the  bottom.  Each  monastery  had  an  abbot  elected 
for  life  by  all  the  monks  to  rule  the  monastery  in 
the  place  of  Christ.  The  abbot  chose  the  prior  and 
deans,  on  the  basis  of  merit,  with  the  approval  of 
the  monks,  but  minor  officials  were  named  directly 
by  the  abbot.  The  important  business  affairs  of 
the  monastery  were  conducted  by  the  abbot  in 
consultation  with  all  the  monks,  but  minor  matters 
required  only  the  advice  of  the  superior  officers. 
Admission  was  open  to  all  ranks  and  classes  of 
men  above  eighteen  on  an  equal  footing  after  one 
year's  probation.  The  two  fundamental  principles 
in  this  constitution  were  labour  and  obedience. 
Indolence  was   branded   as   the    enemy    of   the  soul. 

1  Henderson,  274;  Rule  of  our  most  Holy  Father  Benedict,  Lond., 
1886;     Ogg,  Source  Book,  §    11. 


Monasticism  215 


Each  candidate  had  to  take  the  vow  of  obedience  and 
constancy  to  the  order ;  chastity  and  poverty  of  course 
being;  implied.  A  monk's  day  was  minutely  regulated, 
according  to  the  seasons,  and  consisted  of  an  alternation 
of  manual  work,  study,  and  worship,  with  short  inter- 
vals for  food  and  rest.  Labour  was  thus  regulated 
in  the  monastery  somewhat  as  in  an  industrial  peni- 
tentiary. The  frugal  meal  was  eaten  in  silence  while 
some  edifying  selection  was  read.  The  monks  had 
to  renounce  the  world  and  give  all  the  fruits  of  their 
labours  to  the  monastery. 

Obedience  was  regarded  as  the  most  meritorious 
and  essential  conditirm  of  all.  Mnnastirism  meant  a 
generous  sacrifice  of  self  and  implied  a  surrender  of  the 
will  to  a  superior.  The  monk  must  obey  not  only  the, 
abbot  but  also  the  requests  of  his  brethren.  Monks 
were  treated  as  children  grown  up.  They  could  not 
own  property — not  even  the  smallest  trifles ;  they  were 
not  allowed  to  walk  abroad  at  will ;  if  sent  away,  they 
could  not  eat  without  the  abbot's  permission;  they 
could  not  receive  letters  from  home;  and  they  were 
sent  to  bed  early.  Once  in  the  order  the  vow  of 
stability  prevented  withdrawal.  A  violation  of  any 
of  the  regulations  entailed  punishment :  private  admon- 
ition, exclusion  from  common  prayer,  whipping,  and 
expulsion. 

This  RuleT  all  things  consideredr  was  mild,  flexihje. 
and  general;  with  order,  proportion,  and  regularity  vet 
brief,  concise,  and  well  tempered  to  foe  neerk  nf  west- 
ern  Europe i ;  hence  like  Aaron's  rod  it  soon  swalloweq^ 


up 


the  other  rules  in  use.     Before  600  it  was  supreme 


in  Italy.     In  788  the  Council  of  Aachen  ordered  it  and 
no  other  to  be  used  throughout  the  kingdom  of  Charles 

«  Doyle,  The  Teaching  of  St.   Benedict,  Lond.,  1887. 


216     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  Great.     In  the  ninth  century  it  superseded  the_ 
Isidore    rule   in    Spain.      It    embraced    likewise    the 


Columban  rule  in  w^tprn  F.nrnpe  and  hv  th,e  tprijj^ 
century  prevailed  everywhere.  Under  it  the  Bene-^ 
dictines  had  a  remarkable  history^.  At  one  time  they 
Jiad  ^ 7,000  monasteries  and  altogether  produced  24^ 
Popes,  200  cardinals,  4000  bishops,  and  55,505  saints.1 
The  Benedictine  monasteries  differed  from  later  mon- 
astic bodies  in  the  fact  that  they  were  quite  independent 
of  each  other  and  had  no  common  head.  After  the 
thirteenth  century  they  were  surpassed  by  the  Begging 
Orders  and  devoted  themselves  mostly  to  literary 
pursuits,  soon  becoming  "more  noted  for  learning  than 
piety."  Their  edition  of  the  Church  Fathers  is  a  mon- 
ument of  scholarly  industry.2  Thg_order  still  exists, 
chiefly  in  Austria  and  Italy,  and  is  noted  mostly  for 
its  classical  learning.^  They  boast  of  16,000  distin- 
guished writers. 

These  early  monasteries  were  like  swarming  bees  in 
planting  monastic  societies  in  every  part  of  western 
Europe.  The  passion  grew  until  it  became  a  veritable 
madness  which  seized  the  pious  and  lawless  alike. 
Popes  like  Gregory  I.  praised  the  institution  and  pro- 
moted its  interest  in  every  possible  way.  Even  kings 
like  Carloman  of  the  Franks,  Rochis  of  the  Lombards, 
great  statesmen  like  Cassiodorus,  and  others  voluntarily 
became  monks.  Louis  the  Pious,  the  Roman  Emperor, 
was  prevented  from  that  course  only  by  his  nobles.3 
The  monk  was  the  leader  and  pattern  of  the  Middle 

«  Lea.  Sax:.  Cel.,  116.     See  Cath.  Encyc. 

2  Stephen,  Essays  in  Eccl.  Biog.,  240. 

3  It  was  boasted  that  no  less  than  twenty  Emperors  and  forty- 
»  seven  kings  cast  aside  their  crowns  to  become  Benedictine  monks, 

while   ten   Emperors   and   fifty   queens  entered   convents,   but   it 
is  impossible  to  discover  them. 


Monasticism  217 


Ages.  Every  father  was  ambitious  to  have  his  son 
enter  that  holy  calling.  To  the  quiet  and  peaceful 
abode  of  the  monastery,  therefore,  went  not  only  the 
pious,  but  the  student,  those  who  disliked  the  soldier's 
life,  the  disconsolate,  the  disgraced,  the  disappointed, 
the  indolent,  and  the  weary.  And  this  powerful  organ- 
isation was  utterly  under  the  control  of  the  great 
Roman  Bishop  and  his  subordinates. 

The  remarkable  growth  of  monasticism  brought  great 
wealth  and  political  power,  which  were  used  in  large 
measure  to  strengthen  the  Church.  Kings  and  nobles 
made  large  grants  nf  lands — especially  Charles  the^ 
Great  and  Louis  the  Pious.  Besides  many  monks 
brought  their  possessions  as  gifts   to  the  monastery 

^,nd  not  infrequently  powerful    phhnt.s   \tnnV-  l^r^g   hv 

force .__  Monasticism  thus  gradually  became  secularised 
and  also  feudalised.  Monasteries  were  often  used  as 
prisons  for  deposed  kings,  criminals,  and  clergy  con- 
victed of  crime.  The  abbots  were  virtually  secular  lords 
who  ruled  as  local  sovereigns,  claimed  immunity  from 
tolls  and  taxes,  went  hunting  and  hawking,  and  even 
fought  at  the  head  of  their  troops.  As  a  result  the 
office  of  abbot  became  a  coveted  prize,  for  the  younger 
and  the  illegitimate  sons  of  nobles.1  What  effect 
this  secularisation  had  upon  the  high  ideals  may  be 
easily  seen.  Soon  only  certain  ceremonies  distinguished 
the  monks  from  the  secular  clergy. 

The,  monks  as  such  belong  tn  t.Vip  Ipit.-^  Monasticism 
was  viewed  as  a  lav  institution  as  late  as  the  Council 
of  Chalcedon  U^tI2  when  the  legal  authority  of  the 
bishop  over  the  monks  of  his  diocese  was  recognised. 
The  monks  were  called  religiosi  in  contrast  to  the 

1  Milman,  iii.,  88. 

2  Schaff,  iii.,  173. 


2i 8    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


seculares,  the  priests.  The  monks  were  the  "regulars" 
who  formed  the  spiritual  nobility  and  not  the  ruling 
class  in  the  hierarchy.  They  formed  another  grade 
in  the  hierarchy  between  the  clergy  and  the  laity. 
But  after  the  fifth  century  the  difference  became  less 
marked.  Since  morm.sticism  was  considered  the  per- 
fection  of  Christian  life,  it  was  natural  to  choose  the 
clergy  from  the  monks.  Gregory  the  Great  was,, 
the  first  monk  to  be  elected  Pope.  Monasteries  were 
the  theological  seminaries  to  supply  priests  for  the 
Church,  hence  the  ignorant  clergy  looked  up  to  the 
educated  monks.  Still  monks  at  first,  because  not 
ordained,  could  not  say  mass  nor  hear  confession. 
Each  monastery  kept  a  priest  or  an  ordained  monk 
to  fulfil  these  duties.  Abbots  were  usually  in  priestly 
orders. 1  In  time,  however,  monks  assumed  the  dress 
of  priests  and  became  ambitious  for  priestly  powers.2 
especially  after  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  backed  by 
the  state,  gave  bishops  jurisdiction  over  cloisters. 
Often  monasteries  applied  to  the  Pope  for  independence 
from  episcopal  jurisdiction  and  were  taken  under  the 
immediate  protection  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  By_the 
sixth  century  monks  were  classed  in  the  popular  mind 
with  the  clergy.  In  827  a  council  at  Rome  ordered 
that  abbots  should  be  in  priests'  orders.  Monks  now  be- 
gan to  sit  in  and  to  control  Church  synods,  and  to 
exercise  all  the  rights  of  the  secular  clergy,  even  to  hav- 
ing parishes,3  and  thus  became  powerful  rivals  of  the 
established  priesthood. 

The  crystallisation   of   ascetic  ideals  into  monastic 

* 

1  The  vast  amount  of  legislation  on  this  point  is  very  indicative. 

2  Gregory,  Letter  v.,  i;  i.,  42. 

3  Xhis  right  was  prohibited  in  the  nth  and  12th  centuries,  but 
Innocp^t,  HI.  granted  the  permission  in  certain  cases. 


Monasticism  219 


institutions  was  attacked  by  heathenism  and  did  not 
meet  the  unanimous  approval  of  Christendom.,  Before 
Constantine  the  pagans  denounced  the  hermits  because 
they  were  guilty  of  the  treasonable  act,  from  a  Roman 
view,  of  fleeing  from  social  and  civic  duties.  After 
Constantine,  when  monasticism  became  the  "fad," 
it  was  assailed  by  the  aristocratic  pagan  families,  who' 
lost  sons,  and  especially  wives  and  daughters,  in  the 
maelstrom  of  enthusiasm,  because  it  broke  family 
ties  and  caused  the  neglect  of  obvious  responsibilities. ' 
Julian,  the  imperial  pagan  reactionist,  called  it  fanati- 
cism and  idolatry.  Pagan  poets  like  Libanus  and 
Rutilius  denounced  it  as  an  institution   "hostile  to 

Within  Christendom  hostility  came  from  Christian 
rulers  like  Valens,  because  monasticism  withdrew  civil"  _ 
and  military  strength  fromthe  state,  when  all  was  need- 
eel  againstthe  barbarians,  and  because  it  encouraged 
idleness  and  unproductiveness  instead  of  useful  activity 
and  heroic  virtue * ;  from   Christians  of  wealth  anct 
indulgence    who    felt    rebuked    by    the    earnestness, 
poverty,  and  holy  zeal  of  an  ascetic  life;  from  the 
clergy  who  did  not  comprehend  the  sig^ifiparif^  pf 
monasticism2 ;  and  from  the  libera!  party  in  the  Church 
who  took  a  saner  view  of  salvation  and  ethics.     Jovinian  » 
(d.  406),  like  Luther,  first  a  monk  and  then  a  reformer, 
heldthese  five  points  according  to   Jerome:   (1)  that 
virgins,   widows,   and  wives  are  all   un    an   equality* 
iTgood  Christians ;  (2)  that  thankfully  partaking  of  food 
is  as  efficacious  as  fasting;  (3)  that  spiritual  baptism "" 
is  as  effectual  in  overcoming  the  devil  as  baptism; 

1  Cod.  Theodos.,  xii.,  i,  63. 

2  See  the  works  of  Sulpicius  Severus  for  attacks  on  the  monks  in 
Gaul  and  Spain. 


2  2o     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


(4^that  all  sins  are  equal:  (^)  that  all  rewards  and  pun- 
ishments will  be  equal.  Jerome  answered  him  and 
Pope  Siricius  excommunicated  him  and  his  followers 
as  heretics  faqo).^  Helvidius  of  Rome  denounced  tjif^ 
reverence  for  celibacy  and  declared  that  the  marriage 
state  was  as  holy  as  that  of  virginity.  Again^Jprnrgg 
wielded  his  intellectual  cudgel.2  Bonasus,  Bishop  of 
Sardica,  was  excommunicated  for  holding  the  same 
view  (389).  Vigilantius.  an  educated  Gallic  slave,  a 
disciple  of  Jovinian,  attacked  the  necessity  of  celibacy, 
denied  the  efficacy  of  virginity,  opposed  fasting,  and 
torture,  ridiculed  relics,  ob-jectej  to  cand1esT  incense^ 
and  prayers  for  the  dead,  and  doubted  miracles. 
He  was  a~ Protestant  living  in  the,  fifth  century.3 
He  too  was  assailed  bv  Jerome  and  put  under  the  papal 

^ban.4     ^Erius   of   Sebasta,   a  presbyter,   called   into 
.question  the  need  or  value  of  fasts,  prayers  for  the 
/lead,  the  inequality  of  rank  among  the  clergy,  and  the 
celebration  of  Easter  and  of  course  was  outlawed  by^ 

m  the  Church. 5     Lactantius  declared  that  the  hermit  life 
.was  that  of  a  beast  rather  than  a  man  and  treasonable 


*to  society.     But  all  these  loud  outcries  against 
."monks  were  branded  as  heresy  and  drowned  ii 

^   _^B      sHouts  of  praise. 

^Jr\*     When   the    results  and    influences    of   monasticism 

/   are  carefully  weighed,  it  is  seen  that  the  good  and  evil 

"are  blended  together  almost  inextricably."     These 

,  diametrically    opposite   effects    are    perplexing    and 

m      «  Against  Jovinian  (392). 

2  The  attack  is  found  in  two  works,  Against  Helvidius  (383)  and 
his  Apology. 

3  Gilly,   Vigilantius  and  His  Times,  Lond.,  1844.     See  Jerome's 
writings. 

*  Against  Vigilantius  (406). 
5  Epiphanius,  Heresies,  75. 


Monasticism  221 


astonishing.     Conspicuous  among  the  positive  results 
are  the  following: 

1.  Religious.  The  effort  to  save  pure  Christianity 
from  the  secularised  state-Church  by  carrying  it  to  the 
desert  or  shutting  it  up  in  a  monastery,  produced  the 
first  great  reform  movement  within  the  Christian 
Church.  "It  was  always  the  monks  who  saved  the 
Church  when  sinking,  emancipated  her  when  becoming 
enslaved  to  the  world,  defended  her  when  assailed."  i 
Monasticism  was,  therefore,  a  realisation  of  the  ideal 
in  Christianity.  In  no  small  sense  it  likewise  paved 
the  way  for  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century. 
The  monastic  conquest  of  Christianity  left  in  its  train 
higher  ideals  of  a  holy  Christian  life  and  a  keener 
religious  enthusiasm,  and  emphasised  the  necessity  of 
humility  and  purity.  Likewise  monasticism,  through 
its  aggressive  missionary  efforts,  completed  the  over- 
throw of  heathenism  in  the  Empire  and  in  its  stead 
planted  the  true  faith  over  western  Europe.  The 
monks  were  the  fiercest  champions  of  orthodoxy,  and 
the  intellectual  giants  of  that  age,  like  Jerome  and  St. 
Augustine,  were  in  their  ranks.  The  monk  rather  than 
the  priest  was  the  apostle  of  the  Middle  Ages  who 
taught  men  and  nations  the  simple  Christian  life  of 
the  Gospel.  In  monasticism  were  developed  the 
germs  of  many  humanitarian  institutions  through  which 
Christianity  expressed  itself  in  a  most  practical  manner. 
The  monastery  offered  a  home  to  the  poor  and  unfortu- 
nate, and  gave  hope  and  refuge  to  both  the  religious 
invalid,  who  was  sick  of  the  world,  and  to  the  religious 
fanatic.  The  Papacy,  too,  was  supported  and  strength- 
ened in  a  thousand  different  ways  by  monasticism, 

1  Harnack,  Monasticism,  65. 


222     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  the  whole  religious  history  of  the  Middle  Ages  was 
coloured  by  it. 

2.  Social.  Monasticism  tended  to  purify  and  regen- 
erate society  with  lofty  ideas.  It  became  an  unex- 
celled machine  for  the  administration  of  charity.  It 
fed  the  hungry,  cared  for  the  sick  and  dying,  enter- 
tained the  traveller,  and  was  an  asylum  for  all  the 
unfortunates.  It  helped  to  mitigate  the  terrors  of 
slavery.  It  inculcated  ideas  of  obedience  and  useful- 
ness. It  advocated  and  practised  equality  and  com- 
munism, and  it  tutored  the  half-civilised  nations  of 
western  Europe  in  the  arts  of  peace. 

3.  Political.  In  its  organisation  and  practical  life 
it  kept  alive  ideas  of  democracy.  From  the  ranks 
of  the  monks  came  many  of  the  best  statesmen  in  the 
various  European  governments.  Monastic  zeal  had 
much  to  do  in  saving  the  Roman  Empire  from  utter 
destruction  at  the  hands  of  the  barbarians  and  in  help- 
ing to  preserve  imperial  ideas  until  the  rough  Teutons 
were  Latinised  in  their  legal  and  political  institutions. 
In  addition  the  monks  helped  to  form  the  various 
law  codes  of  the  German  tribes,  put  them  into  written 
form,  and  took  an  active  part  in  many  forms  of  local 
government.  In  many  an  instance  they  saved  the 
unprotected  vassal  from  the  tyrannical  noble. 

4.  Educational.  In  the  monasteries  the  torches 
of  civilisation  and  learning  were  kept  burning  during 
the  so-called  Dark  Ages.  The  first  musicians,  painters, 
sculptors,  architects,  and  educators  of  Christian  Europe 
were  monks.  They  not  only  established  the  schools, 
and  were  the  schoolmasters  in  them,  but  also  laid 
the  foundations  for  the  universities.  They  were  the 
thinkers  and  philosophers  of  the  day  and  shaped  the 
political  and  religious  thought.     To  them,  both  col- 


Monasticism  223 


lectively  and  individually,  was  due  the  continuity  of 
thought  and  civilisation  of  the  ancient  world  with  the 
later  Middle  Ages  and  with  the  modern  period. 

5.  Industrial.  Not  only  did  the  monks  develop 
the  various  arts  such  as  copying  and  illuminating 
books,  building  religious  edifices,  painting,  and  carving, 
but  they  also  became  the  model  farmers  and  horticul- 
turists of  Europe.  Every  Benedictine  monastery  was 
an  agricultural  college  for  the  whole  region  in  which  it 
was  located.  By  making  manual  labour  an  essential 
part  of  monastic  life,  labour  was  greatly  ennobled  above 
the  disreputable  position  it  held  among  the  Romans. 

The  negative  effects  of  monasticism  were  by  no 
means  lacking  and  may  be  stated  here  under  the  same 
institutional  headings : 

1.  Religious.  In  making  "war  on  nature"  the 
ascetics  made  war  also  on  God.  They  aimed  not 
too  high  religiously  but  in  the  wrong  direction.  They 
exaggerated  sin  and  advocated  the  wrong  means  to 
get  rid  of  it.  They  took  religion  away  from  the  crowded 
centres  of  population,  where  it  was  most  needed,  to  the 
desert  or  monastery.  Thus  an  abnormal,  unwholesome 
type  of  piety  was  created.  In  replacing  faith  bf 
works  the  monks  thus  gave  birth  to  a  long  list  of  abuses 
in  the  Church,  and  in  nourishing  an  insane  religious 
fanaticism  they  entailed"  many  grave  evils.  From 
one  point  of  view  monasticism  became  a  "morbid 
excrescence"  of  Christianity  and  tended  to  degrade 
man  into  a  mere  religious  machine.  At  the  same  time 
the  doctrine  of  future  rewards  and  punishments  reached 
an  abhorrent  evolution.  The  awful  pangs  of  hell,  the 
terrific  judgments  of  God,  and  the  ubiquitous  and  wily 
devil  of  the  monks'  vivid  imagination  sound  strange 
to  a  modern  mind.      But  the  gravest  error  in  the 


? 


224     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


monastic  system  was  the  false  and  harmful  distinction 
so  clearly  drawn  both  in  theory  and  practice  between 
the  secular  and  the  religious.     The  modern  world  easily  I    A 
harmonises  the  two. 

2.  Social.  Monasticism  disrupted  family  ties  and 
caused  the  desertion  of  social  duties  on  the  ground 
of  a  more  sacred  duty.  It  lowered  respect  for  the 
marriage  state  by  magnifying  the  virtue  of  celibacy. 
In  making  the  monk  the  ideal  man  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
it  advocated  social  suicide.  All  natural  pleasures 
and  enjoyments  of  life  were  labelled  sinful.  Practices, 
which  were  little  more  than  superstitions,  were  advo- 
cated. Society  in  general  was  demoralised  because 
monasticism  failed  to  practise  its  own  teachings. 

3.  Political.  By  inducing  thousands,  and  many  of 
them  men  of  character,  ability,  and  experience,  to 
desert  their  posts  of  civic  duty,  the  state  was  weakened 
and  patriotism  forgotten.  The  monk  "died  to  the 
world"  and  abjured  his  country.  Monasticism  aided 
powerfully  in  developing  the  secular  side  of  the  papal 
hierarchy  and  soon  came  to  exercise  a  large  amount 
of  political  power  itself.  The  monks  frequently  became 
embroiled  in  social  disputes  and  military  quarrels, 
and  thus  incited  rather  than  allayed  the  fiercer  brute 
passions  of  men. 

4.  Cultural.  By  holding  the  education  of  the  people 
in  their  hands  the  monks  had  a  powerful  weapon  for 
evil  as  well  as  good.  In  making  the  monk  the  ideally 
cultured  man  a  false  standard  was  set  up  and  certain 
fundamentals  in  education  ignored.  Secular  learning 
was  not  generally  encouraged.  The  supreme  end  of 
all  their  education  was  not  to  produce  a  man,  but  a 
priest. 

5.  Industrial.     Thousands  withdrew  from  the  vari- 


Monasticism  225 


ous  lines  of  industrial  activity,  some  to  obtain  the 
higher  good,  but  many  to  enter  as  they  supposed  a 
life  of  ease  and  idleness.  Much  of  the  good  that 
was  done  in  the  earlier  days  was  negatived  by  the 
begging  friars  later. 

Of  these  two  sets  of  influences  which  predominated  ? 
That  both  were  powerful  no  one  can  doubt.  All  things 
considered,  however,  it  must  be  said  that  monasticism, 
as  it  developed  in  the  West,  fulfilled  a  genuine  need 
and  performed  an  important  service  for  Christian 
civilisation.  St.  Benedict  not  only  presented  a 
satisfactory  solution  of  the  grave  dangers  threatening 
this  institution  as  a  force  in  the  evolution  of  the 
mediaeval  Church,  but  with  his  organised  army  of 
devoted,  obedient  followers,  he  met  the  barbarian 
hosts  invading  the  Roman  Empire  and  gradually  won 
them  to  adopt  and  in  due  course  of  time  to  practise 
the  Christian  code.  Indeed  it  is  difficult  to  imagine 
how  the  Church  could  have  forged  its  course  so  triumph- 
antly through  all  the  breakers,  trials,  and  vicissitudes 
of  this  crucial  epoch — how  its  jurisdiction  could  have 
been  extended  so  rapidly  and  so  effectively  to  all 
parts  of  western  Europe  and  to  some  points  in  the 
East  and  in  northern  Africa — how  its  great  human- 
ising, spiritualising,  and  edifying  influences  could  have 
been  so  persistent  and  at  the  same  time  so  efficient — 
how  the  simple,  fundamental  truths  of  the  Gospel 
as  set  forth  in  the  Apostolic  Church  could  have  been 
handed  on  to  the  later  ages — had  not  the  growth  of 
monasticism  been  regulated  and  utilised.  Therefore, 
next  to  the  evolution  of  that  magnificent  organisation 
of  the  Papacy,  as  a  creative  factor  in  the  rise  of  the 
mediaeval  Church,  must  be  placed  organised,  western 
monasticism. 


226     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Sources 


A.— PRIMARY: 

I. — JEWISH! 

i. — Old  Testament. 

2. — Josephus,  Antiquities,  i.,  bk-.-  15,  ch.  10,  sec. 

4-5;  bk.  18,  ch.  1,  sec.  5;  ii.,  bk.  2,  ch.  8,  sec. 

2— 11.  ^ 

3. — Philo,  Contemplative  Life.    -Bohn,  Eccl.  Lib., 

1855,  iv.,  1-21. 

11. — Greek: 

1. — New  Testament. 

2. — New  Testament  Apocrypha, 

3. — Eusebius,  Church  Hist.,  it',  ch.  17.    Nic.  and 

Post-Nic.  Fathers,  i.     Several  other  eds. 
4. — Socrates,  Church  Hist.,  i«,   13;  iv.,  23  ff.  Ib.r 

ii.     Other  eds. 
5. — Sozomen,   Church  Hist.,  i.,    12-14;  iii.,   14; 

vi.,  28-34.     lb.,  ii.' 
6. — Theodoret,   Church  Hist.,   ch.   33.      lb.,  iii. 

Bohn  Lib. 
7. — Evagrius,  Life  of  St.  Anthony.     Bohn  Lib., 

1851. 
8. — Palladius,  Historia  Lausiaca.     Ed.  by  Butler, 

Texts  and  Studies.     Camb.,  1898. 
9. — Concerning  the  Ascetic  Life.     Not  in  Eng. 

III. LATIN : 

1. — Sulpicius  Se veins,  Dialogues,  i.-iii.     Nic.  and 

Post-Nic.  Fathers,  2d  serM  xi.,  pt.  11. 
2. — Athanasius,  Life  of  Anthony.     lb.,  iv.,  195- 
221. 
— Ambrose,  Concerning  Virgins,     lb.,  x.,  360. 

Letters,  No.  63.     76.,  457. 
— Augustine,    The   Work   of  Monks.     Fathers 

of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  xxii.,  470-516. 
— Cassian,  Institutes.     Nic.  and  Post-Nic.  Fath- 
ers, 2d  ser.,  xi.    Ccenobia,  lb.    Conferences,  lb. 
— Jerome,  Life  of  St.  Paul  the  First  Hermit, 
lb.,  vi.,  299-318;  Letters,  No.  22,  130.     lb. 
7. — Gregory  the  Great,   Letters.     lb.,  xii. ;  Life 
and  Miracles  of  St.  Benedict.     Ed.  by  Luck, 
Lond.,  1880. 
8. — Rufinus,  History  of  Monks.     Not  in  Eng. 


Monasticism 


227 


-Cassiodorus,    Dissertation    on   Monasticism. 
Not  in  Eng.     Letters.     Ed.  by  Hodgkin,  Oxf., 


IV. 


-collections: 


1. — Apostolic  Canons.     See  Ch.  IX.  of  this  work. 

2. — Apostolic  Constitutions.     lb. 

3. — Henderson,  Select  Histor.  Docs,  of  the  M.  A., 

274-314. 
4. — Univ.  of  Neb.,  Europ.  Hist.  Studies,  ii.,  No.  6. 
5. — Univ.  of  Pa.,  Translations  and  Reprints,  ii., 

No.  7. 

B—  SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Allies,  T.  W.,   The  Monastic  Life  from  the 

Fathers  of  the  Desert  to  Charlemagne.     Lond., 

1896. 
— Browne,  E.  G.  K.,  Monastic  Legends.     Lond. 
— Butler,  A.,  Lives  of  the  Saints.     Lond.,  1833, 

2  vols.     Bait.,  1844,  4  vols. 
— Day,  S.  P.,    Monastic     Institutions.     Lond. 

1865. 
— Dill,  S.,  Roman  Society  in  the  Last  Century 

of  the  Western  Empire.     N.  Y.,  1904. 
— Fosbroke,  T.  D.,  British  Monachism.      3d. 

ed.     Lond.,  1843. 
— Fox,    S.,    Monks   and   Monasticism    (Eng.). 

Lond.,  1848. 
— Hardy,  H.  S.,  Eastern  Monachism.      Lond., 

,  Monasticism:  Its  Ideals  and 
1886.     Tr.  by  Gillett,    N.    Y. 


— Harnack,   A. 

Its    History. 

Lond.,  1895. 
10. — Hill,   O.   T.,   English   Monasticism.    Lond., 

1867. 
— Jameson,  Mrs.  A.,  Legends  of  the   Monastic 

Orders.    Lond.,  1850.     Rev.  ed.     Bost.,  1896. 
— Kingsley,  C,  The  Hermits:  Their  Lives  and 

Works.     Lond.,  1885. 
— Lea,  H.  C,  History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy. 

Phil.,  1884.     3d  ed.     N.  Y.,  1907.     2  vols. 
— Lechner,  D.  P.,  Life  and  Times  of  St.  Bene- 
dict.    Lond. 
15. — Littledale,  R.  F.,  Monachism.     Encyc.  Brit. 


13 


14 


228    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


1 6. — Montalembert,  Count  de,  Monks  of  the  West. 

New  ed.     Lond.,  1896.     7  vols. 
17. — Northcote,  J.   S.,   Celebrated  Sanctuaries  of 

the  Madonna.     Lond.,  1868. 
18. — Ruffner,  H.,  Fathers  of  the  Desert.     N.  Y., 

1850.     2  vols. 
19. — Smith,  I.  G.,  Christian  Monasticism  (4th-9th 

cent.).     Lond.,  1892. 
20. — Wishart,  A.  D.,  Short  History  of  Monks  and 

Monasticism.     Lond.,  1900. 
II. — general: 

Adams,  Civ.  of  M.  A.  Adeney,  ch.  13.  Alzog, 
ii.,  114-121.  Butler,  Ch.  Hist.,  ch.  34-35. 
Brown,  Stoics  and  Saints,  ch.  5-6.  Cheetham, 
ch.  12,  sec.  3-4.  Church,  Begin,  of  M.  A.,  48, 
58.  Clarke,  Events  and  Epochs,  ch.  3-4.  Coxe, 
Lect.  3,  sec.  3.  Cunningham,  West.  Civ. ,ii.,  37-40. 
Darras,  i.,  636;  ii.,  34,  35,  121,  387;  iii.,  43. 
Dollinger,  ii.,  ch.  5,  sec.  9;  iii.,  ch.  4,  sec.  6. 
Draper,  Intel.  Develop,  of  Europe.  Fisher,  111, 
113,  114,  115,  116,  175,  234.  Fitzgerald,  i.,  215- 
227.  Foulkes,  88,  93,  150-151,  221,  243,  349. 
Gibbon,  ch.  37.  Gieseler,  ii.,  ch.  4,  sec.  95-97. 
Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  9,  22,  45.  Hase,  sec.  132-136. 
Hurst,  i.,  ch.  30-31.  Jennings,  i.,  ch.  6.  Kurtz, 
i.,  248-258,  503-509.  Lecky,  Hist,  of  Eur  op. 
Morals,  ii.,  ch.  4.  Mahan,  bk.  4,  ch.  12.  Mait- 
land,  Dark  Ages.  Milman,  i.,  bk.  1,  ch.  2 ;  bk.  3, 
ch.  1;  ii.,  bk.  3,  ch.  6.  Milner,  i.,  cent.  4,  ch.  5. 
Moeller,  i.,  355-377.  Mosheim,  bk.  ii.,  cent,  iv., 
ch.  3,  §  13.  Neander,  ii.,  262.  Newman,  i.,  451. 
Putnam,  Books  and  their  Makers,  i.  Robertson, 
bk.  2,  ch.  6,  sec.  4.  Schaff,  iii.,  147.  Zenos,  104, 
154,  I71- 


CHAPTER  XII 

SPREAD   OF  THE    CHRISTIAN   CHURCH   OVER  EUROPE 

Outline:  I. — Extent  of  Christianity  under  Gregory  the 
Great.  II. — Character  of  missionary  work  from  the  sixth  to  the 
tenth  century.  III. — Conversion  of  the  British  Isles.  IV. — Con- 
version of  the  Franks.  V. — Conversion  of  the  Germans.  VI. — 
Conversion  of  Scandinavia.  VII. — Planting  of  the  Church  among 
the  Slavs.  VIII. — Efforts  to  convert  the  Mohammedans.  IX. — 
Sources. 

FROM  the  outset  the  Christian  Church  was 
imbued  with  a  most  intense  and  burning 
general  missionary  zeal.  The  command  came 
in  very  distinct  terms  from  the  Master  himself. *  But 
there  was  no  recognised  principle  of  propagandism 
and  no  special  organisations  to  carry  on  the  work. 
Each  Christian  felt  the  individual  obligation  to  win 
his  fellows  to  the  new  faith.  Separate  churches  no 
doubt  naturally  felt  the  necessity  of  some  corporate 
action  to  convert  the  heathen  in  the  neighbourhood. 
Prayers,  indeed,  for  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  were 
early  made  an  integral  part  of  the  liturgies  of  the 
Church,  East  and  West.2  The  actual  diffusion  of 
Christianity,  however,  proceeded  in  a  special  sense 
from  the  evangelical  labours  of  the  individual  bishops 3 

1  Matt,  xxviii.,  19,  20. 

2  Ignatius,  Letter  to  the  Ephesians,  ch.  10.  See  Smith  and  Cheet- 
ham,  art.  on  "The  Heathen." 

3  An  illustration  of  what  must  have  been  a  common  practice 
is  found  in  the  case  of  Eusebius,  the  Bishop  of  Vercelli,  who  made 
his  cathedral  church  the  centre  of  a  wide  missionary  field. 

229 


230     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  the  clergy.  In  fact  missionary  work  was  regarded 
as  one  of  their  specific  duties  handed  down  from  the 
Apostles.  With  the  development  of  the  organisation 
of  the  Church  and  the  appearance  of  patriarchs  arose 
the  thought  that  it  was  the  duty  of  these  powerful 
centres  to  carry  on  missionary  activity  in  foreign 
fields.  Monasticism  was  early  utilised  for  this  im- 
portant work.  It  must  never  be  forgotten  that  the 
aggressive  evangelising  efforts  of  the  early  Church 
were  mainly  those  of  the  West,  and  here  is  seen  another 
powerful  factor  in  the  rise  of  the  mediaeval  Church. 

The  conception  early  developed  in  the  Church  that 
the  spread  of  God's  Kingdom  on  earth  was  a  warfare. 
That  idea  was  founded  on  the  words  of  Jesus,1  on 
the  assertions  of  the  Apostles,  and  on  the  sacrifices  of 
the  early  martyrs.  Monasticism  made  this  conviction 
peculiarly  personal.  The  organised  Church  asserted  it 
on  every  occasion.  The  conversion  of  the  barbarians 
was  viewed,  in  a  broad  sense,  as  an  invasion  and  a 
conquest.  It  was  a  campaign  with  all  western  Europe 
as  its  field.  In  time  it  covered  six  centuries  or  more. 
The  generals,  the  able  strategists,  were  the  competent 
and  zealous  Roman  pontiffs, and  the  subordinate  officers 
were  emperors,  kings,  princes,  bishops,  and  abbots. 
The  army  was  that  great  host  of  devoted  monks,  of 
consecrated  priests,  and  earnest  Christian  laymen. 
The  weapons  in  the  hands  of  these  conquerors  were 
Christian  love  and  sympathy.  They  were  driven  on  by 
an  irresistible  zeal  for  saving  souls.  They  were  clothed 
in  the  power  of  poverty,  austerity,  suffering,  obedience, 
and  self-denial.  The  conflict  was  one  which,  in  its 
outcome,  was  to  shape  the  destiny  of  the  world. 

The  man  above  all  others  who  was  carried  away 

1  Matt,  x.,  34. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     231 


by  this  dream  of  duty  for  the  Church  militant  in  win- 
ning those  outside  the  true  Church  to  membership, 
was  the  monk-Pope,  Gregory  the  Great.  Pagan  Rome 
had  failed  to  make  a  complete  and  permanent  conquest 
•of  the  barbarians.  Christian  Rome,  inspired  by  this 
master  spirit,  was  to  succeed  in  conquering  both  the 
bodies  and  the  souls  of  the  barbarians,  and  to  use 
them  for  her  own  glory. 

When  Gregory  the  Great  died  in  604,  Christendom 
practically  covered  the  Roman  Empire  and  at  certain 
points  extended  beyond  it.  Those  who  bore  the  name 
Christian  included  Jews,  Romans,  Greeks,  Celts,  and 
Germans.  The  Christian  world  was  already  divided 
into  two  great  branches — the  Eastern,  or  Greek 
Church,  and  the  Western,  or  Roman  Church, — which 
were  becoming  more  and  more  pronounced  in  their 
differences. 

The  Christian  missionary  work,  from  the  sixth  to  the 
twelfth  century,  must  be  viewed  broadly  as  a  process 
of  civilisation,  since  the  missionaries  carried  with  them 
intellectual  light,  as  well  as  spiritual  truth,  and  paved 
the  way  for  law  and  justice.  They  opened  up  channels 
through  which  the  higher  ideals  and  better  institutions 
of  the  south  might  work  northward  to  revolutionise 
agriculture,  trade,  social  life,  and  general  economic 
conditions.  "The  experience  of  all  ages,"  said  Nean- 
der,  "teaches  us  that  Christianity  has  only  made  a 
firm  and  living  progress,  where  from  the  first  it  has 
brought  with  it  the  seeds  of  all  human  culture, 
although  they  have  only  been  developed  by  degrees."  1 

Mediaeval  conversion  to  Christianity  was,  as  a  rule, 
tribal,  or  national,  rather  than  individual,  or  personal, 
and  consequently  it  took  some  time  before  satisfactory 

1  Neander,  Light  in  Dark  Places,  417 


232     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


fruitage  was  noticeable  in  the  lives  of  the  people. 
But  it  was  a  great  victory  to  substitute  the  Christian 
for  the  pagan  ideal.  The  agencies  employed  to  carry 
out  this  process  of  conversion  were:  (1)  missionaries, 
mostly  Latin,  Celtic,  English,  German,  Greek,  and 
Slavic  monks ;  (2)  the  sword  in  the  hands  of  a  stern 
ruler;  (3)  the  marriage  of  Christian  women  to  pagan 
kings  and  princes ;  and  (4)  the  recognised  superiority 
of  Christianity,  Christian  institutions,  and  Christian 
nations.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind,  likewise,  that 
some  of  the  German  tribes  settled  in  the  very  heart 
of  Christendom  where  Christian  influences  could 
operate  directly  and  immediately. 

The  earliest  successful  conversion  of  the  Teutons  was 
to  Arianism.  That  work  was  begun  at  least  as  early  as 
the  time  of  Constantine,  because  a  Gothic  bishop  sat  in 
the  Council  of  Nicaea  (325).  Bishop  Ulfilas  (d.  38 1) ,  the 
"Apostle  to  the  Goths,"  called  by  Constantine  the 
Great  "the  Moses  of  the  Goths,"  1  translated  the  Bible 
into  Gothic2  and  won  his  countrymen  to  Arianism. 
St.  Chrysostom  in  404  established  in  Constantinople 
a  school  for  the  training  of  Gothic  missionaries.  3 
The  Ostrogoths,  Visigoths,  Burgundians,  and  Vandals 
all  embraced  that  faith.  But  the  fervent  and  more 
aggressive  missionary  zeal  of  Rome  gradually  replaced 
Arianism  in  western  Europe  with  orthodox  Christian- 
ity— the  Burgundians  in  517,  the  Suevi  in  550,  the 

1  Philostorgius,  Keel.  Hist.,  ii.,  5. 

2  To  do  that  Ulfilas  had  to  invent  an  alphabet.  Whether  he 
translated  the  whole  Bible  or  only  a  part  of  it  is  unknown,  since  only 
fragments  of  his  work  have  come  down  to  us.  See  Schaff,  Com- 
panion to  the  Greek  Testament,  N.  Y.,  1883,  160;  Sozomen, 
Eccl.  Hist.,  ii.,  6;  Philostorgius,  Eccl.  Hist.,  ii.,  5;  Scott,  Ulfilas, 
Apostle  to  the  Goths,  Lond.,  1885. 

3  Theodoret,  Eccl.  Hist.,  v.,  30. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     233 


Visigoths  in  587,  the  Lombards,  the  last  stronghold 
of  Arianism  in  the  West,  in  the  eighth  century. 

The  unparalleled  missionary  activity  of  the  Roman 
Church  was  due  of  course  primarily  to  religious  en- 
thusiasm, but  other  causes  must  also  be  taken  into 
account.  As  a  matter  of  self-preservation  to  protect 
herself  from  the  inveterate  paganism  of  the  ancient 
world,  on  the  one  hand,  and  from  the  torrent  of  bar- 
baric invaders,  on  the  other,  the  conflict  was  thrust 
upon  Rome  and  she  must  conquer  or  perish.  Again  the 
development  of  the  hierarchy  along  the  lines  of  the 
Petrine  theory  made  it  imperative  that  Rome  should 
win  and  rule  the  West.  The  wise  policy  of  winning 
kings  first  and  nations  afterwards  was  simply  adopted 
from  Roman  imperial  practice  but  it  was  eminently 
successful.  It  likewise  enabled  the  Pope  of  Rome 
to  control  all  missionary  enterprise  from  his  ecclesi- 
astical capital,  and  to  employ  it  for  the  further 
extension  of  the  papal  prerogative. 

The  results  of  the  spread  of  Christianity  over  the 
Grasco-Roman  world  have  already  been  considered. 
That  conquest  decidedly  modified  the  Apostolic  Church 
in  organisation,  in  ceremony,  and  in  doctrine,  and  laid 
the  foundations  for  the  Roman  and  Greek  Churches. 
The  Romanised,  monasticised  Christian  Church  over 
which  Gregory  the  Great  ruled  reveals  the  product 
of  all  these  early  influences.  The  conversion  of  the 
Teutons  to  Roman  Christianity  marks  another  new 
epoch  not  only  in  the  history  of  the  Church,  but  also  in 
the  history  of  the  world.  Just  as  from  the  Apostolic 
Church  emerged  the  Roman  Church  with  its  pronounced 
differences,  so  from  the  Roman  Church  evolved  the 
Teutonic-Roman  Church,  which  in  turn  was  strikingly 
unlike    its    prototype    in    several    particulars.     The 


234     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Germanised  Roman  Church  declared  its  absolute  in- 
dependence of  the  Eastern  Emperor  and  launched 
out  on  a  new  world  career.  The  product  of  all  these 
elements  was  the  mediaeval  Church  which  stood  for 
primitive  Christianity  modified  first  by  a  growth 
covering  five  centuries  through  a  stratum  of  Roman 
civilisation,  and  secondly  for  seven  centuries  through 
a  superimposed  stratum  of  Germanic  civilisation. 

When  the  pagan  Franks  began  their  conquest  of 
Gaul  (486),  they  encountered  a  civilisation  that  was 
nominally  Christian.  Their  king,  Clovis,  married 
Clotilda,  a  Christian  princess,  the  daughter  of  the 
Burgundian  king 1  (493) .  She  no  doubt  laboured  with 
her  lord  and  master  to  induce  him  to  embrace  her 
faith.  He  permitted  his  child  to  be  baptised  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Christian  rite  and  tolerated  Christian 
priests  and  monks  as  a  matter  of  policy,  but  that  was 
all.  At  length  in  a  battle  with  the  stubborn  Alemanni, 
Clovis,  hard-pressed,  prayed  to  the  Christian  God  and 
promised  to  turn  Christian  himself  in  exchange  for 
victory.  His  foes  fled  and  left  him  conqueror.  True 
to  his  vow,  Clovis,  after  receiving  instruction  from 
Bishop  Remigius  of  Rheims,  was  baptised  on  Christmas 
day  496  and  with  him  3000  warriors.  This  important 
event,  "  the  first  step  toward  the  world-historical  union 
of  Teutonic  civilisation  with  the  Roman  Church,"2 
paved  the  way  for  Charles  the  Great,  and  made  possible 
a  Christian  France.  This  event  was  a  significant 
victory  for  the  Nicene  Creed  and  for  the  Pope  of  Rome. 
Orthodoxy  and  Roman  dominion  now  advanced  side 
by  side  with  Frankish  conquests  until  both  became 

1  On  the  conversion  of  the  Burgundians,  see  Socrates,  Eccl.  Hist., 
ii.,  30. 

2  Richter,  36,  n.  6;  Bouquet,  iv.,  49.     See  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §6. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     235 


absolutely  independent  of  the  imperial  power  in  the 
East.1 

The  Romans  abandoned  the  island  of  Britain  in  409 
for  ever.  About  450  the  pagan  kinsmen  of  the  Franks, 
namely  the  Angles,  Saxons,  Jutes,  and  Frisians, 
crossed  to  Britain  and  there  found  the  Christian  Church 
already  planted.2  They  drove  it  back  to  Wales, 
Ireland,  and  Scotland,  or  crushed  it  out  altogether. 
The  Christian  Celts,  who  were  thus  treated,  made  no 
effort  at  first  to  convert  their  heathen  conquerors.3 
That  was  left  to  missionaries  from  Rome  under  the 
leadership  of  the  monk  Augustine.  Bede,  the  venerable 
Church  historian,  tells  the  pious  tale  of  how  Gregory 
the  Great,  before  being  made  Pope,  saw  in  the  slave 
market  of  Rome  some  boys  "of  a  white  body  and  fair 
countenance"  and  forthwith  became  so  deeply  inter- 
ested in  them  and  their  land  that  he  begged  the  Pope 
to  send  him  as  missionary  to  Britain.4  The  Romans, 
it  is  said,  refused  to  allow  him  to  go,  and  soon  honoured 
him  with  the  tiara  of  St.  Peter.  As  Pope,  however,  he 
carried  out  his  intention  by  sending  Augustine,  a 
Benedictine  abbot,  with  forty  monks  and  Gallic 
interpreters  and  with  letters  and  a  library  of  sacred 
literature,  to  England  in  596  to  begin  the  work.s 

1  Perry,  Franks,  488. 

2  Bede,  i.,  47;  Lingard,  i.,  46;  Haddon  and  Stubbs,  i.,  22-26; 
Pryce,  Anc.  Brit.  Ch.,  31;  Tertullian,  Against  Judceos,  7;  Gildas; 
Ogg,  Source  Book,  §8.  The  early  history  of  the  British  Church  is 
obscure.  By  the  second  century  the  Gospel  had  spread  through 
the  southern  parts  of  the  island.  Three  British  bishops  attended 
the  Council  of  Aries,  314,  and  others  were  present  at  the  Council  of 
Sardica  in  347  and  the  Council  of  Rimini  in  359. 

i  Bede,  i.,  22. 
*  Ibid.,  ii.,  ch.  1. 

s  Bede,  i.,  2 5 .  See  Nic.  and Post-Nic.  Fathers,  2d  ser.,  xii.,  Epistles; 
Haddon  and  Stubbs,  iii.,  5;  Cheney,  Readings  in  Eng.  Hist.,  N.  Y., 


236      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Now  it  happened  that  Ethelbert,  the  King  of  Kent, 
had  married  Bertha,  a  Christian  princess  from  Paris, 
who  had  been  permitted  to  take  a  Gallic  bishop  with  her 
to  England.  Thus  the  way  had  been  already  opened 
for  the  favourable  reception  of  the  monks  under  the 
guidance  of  Augustine,  which  led  in  597  to  the  con- 
version of  Ethelbert  at  Canterbury,  and  with  him 
nominally  the  whole  kingdom  of  Kent.  At  the  first 
Christmas  festival  Ethelbert  and  10,000  of  his  subjects 
were  baptised.  Thus  Roman  Christianity  became  at 
once  the  established  state  Church  and  "everywhere  the 
bishop's  throne  was  set  up  side  by  side  with  the  king's."  * 
Augustine,  as  a  reward  for  his  successful  services,  was 
soon  made  the  first  archbishop  of  England  2  and  pro- 
ceeded to  organise  the  Church  by  sending  to  Rome 
for  more  helpers,  by  appointing  bishops  and  priests 
to  particular  fields  of  labour,  by  purifying  pagan 
temples  and  dedicating  them  to  Christian  services,  and 
by  repairing  and  building  Christian  churches  and 
monasteries.  As  a  result  of  the  sincere,  practical 
measures  adopted  by  Augustine,  thousands  were  soon 
won  to  the  new  faith  and  Christianity  was  permanently 
replanted  in  the  British  Islands.  The  work,  so  well 
begun,  was  continued  until  Sussex,  the  last  kingdom 
of  the  heptarchy,  in  604,  embraced  the  popular  religion. 
Pope  Gregory  the  Great  took  a  keen  interest  in  this 
grand  triumph  and  made  it  contribute  to  the  glory  of 
the  Roman  Church.3 

The  monks  sent  to  England  by  Pope  Gregory  the 

1908,  46-52;  Ogg,  Soutce  Book,  §9;  Thorne,  Chronicles  0}  St.  Au- 
gustine's Abbey;  Stanley,  Memorials  of  Canterbury.  See  Allies,  Hist, 
of  Ch.  in  Eng. 

1  Bede,  i.,  26.     See  Green,  Short  Hist,  of  Eng.  People,  ch.  1,  §1. 

2  He  went  over  to  Aries,  France,  to  be  consecrated.     Bede,  i.,  27. 

3  Bede,  i.,  32. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe      237 

Great  soon  came  to  see  that  the  Celtic  Church  differed 
from  theirs  in  many  respects.  Augustine  himself, 
having  concluded  an  alliance  between  Ethelbert  and 
the  Roman  See,  held  several  conferences  with  the 
Christian  Celts  in  order  to  accomplish  the  most  difficult 
task  of  their  subjugation  to  Roman  authority.  These 
differences  were  largely  ritualistic  and  disciplinary. 
The  Celtic  Christians  celebrated  Easter  according  to 
the  calculation  of  Sulpicius  Severus,  while  the  Romans 
had  another  mode  of  computing  the  proper  day.1 
The  Celts  appealed  to  St.  John,  the  Romans  to  St. 
Peter. 2  The  Celtic  Church  might  be  called  a  monastic 
Church,  since  the  abbot  ruled  over  the  bishop.3  The 
Celts  shaved  the  front  of  the  head  from  ear  to  ear  as  a 
tonsure,  while  the  Romans  shaved  the  top  of  the  head 
leaving  a  "crown  of  thorns." *  The  Celts  permitted 
their  priests  to  marry,  the  Romans  forbade  it.  The 
Celts  used  a  different  mode  of  baptism  from  that  of  the 
Romans,  namely,  single  instead  of  trine  immersion. 
The  calendar  for  all  movable  festivals  was  not  the 
same.  The  Celts  held  their  own  councils  and  enacted 
their  own  laws,  independent  of  Rome.  The  Celts  used 
a  Latin  Bible  unlike  the  Vulgate,  and  kept  Saturday 
as  a  day  of  rest,  with  special  religious  services  on 
Sunday.5     Notwithstanding    these    variances,    which 

1  Until  about  seventy -five  years  previous  Rome  herself  had  used 
the  same  method  of  calculation.  Dionysius  Exiguus,  a  Scythian 
monk,  who  instituted  the  practice  of  dating  events  from  the  birth 
of  Christ,  invented  the  new  method  the  latter  part  of  the  fifth 
century.     See  Cutts,  Aug.,  132. 

2  Skene,  ii.,  9;  Killen,  Eccl.  Hist,  of  Ire.,  i.,  57. 

3  Bede,  iii.,  5. 

4  Bede,  v.,  21.  The  Greeks  shaved  the  head  completely.  See 
Cutts,  Aug.,  136. 

5  Bellesheim,  Hist,  of  Cath.  Ch.  inScot.,  Edinb.,  1887-89,  4  vols.. 
i.,  86. 


238     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


do  not  seem  to  be  at  all  on  the  fundamentals,  there 
were  many  doctrinal  and  constitutional  resemblances. 
Both  churches  were  orthodox;  both  used  a  Latin 
ritual 1 ;  both  had  developed  an  episcopal  organisation ; 
both  believed  in  monasticism ;  and  both  were  actively- 
engaged  in  missionary  work.  Nevertheless  the  British 
Christians  looked  with  much  disfavour  upon  the 
Augustine  mission  to  convert  their  pagan  conquerors 
and  oppressors. 

King  Ethelbert  in  602  arranged  a  conference  of 
British  and  Roman  bishops  on  the  Severn  in  Essex.2 
At  that  gathering  Augustine  with  unreasonable  rigour 
and  haughtiness  demanded  conformity;  the  Britains 
refused  to  surrender  their  independence.  To  settle  the 
matter  Augustine  proposed  that  an  appeal  be  made 
to  a  miracle.  Accordingly  a  blind  Anglo-Saxon  was 
brought  in.  The  Celtic  clergy  prayed  over  him  in  vain. 
Whereupon  Augustine  knelt  and  prayed,  and  immedi- 
ately the  blind  man  was  restored  to  sight,3  but  the 
Celts  refused  to  accept  that  act  as  final  without  the 
consent  of  a  larger  representation  in  the  synod.  The 
next  year,  therefore,  a  second  council  was  held  at 
which  the  persistent  Augustine  once  more  demanded 
conformity  to  Roman  practices  and  the  recognition 
of  papal  supremacy,  and  also  requested  missionary 
co-operation,  but  the  Britains,  displeased  with  Augus- 
tine's narrow  dogmatism  and  apprehensive  of  the  loss 
of  their  freedom,  refused  to  submit.  "As  you  will 
not  have  peace  with  brethren,"  said  the  stern  Roman 
monk,  "you  shall  have  war  from  foes;  and  as  you  will 

1  Warren,  Liturgy  and  Ritual  of  the  Celtic  Ch.,  Lond.,  1881. 

2  Haddon  and  Stubbs,  iii.,  40. 

3  This  incident  is  regarded  as  an  interpolation  in  Bede's  History. 
Hook,  Archbishops  of  Canterbury,  i.,  68,  69. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe      239 


not  preach  unto  the  English  the  way  of  life,  you  shall 
suffer  at  their  hands  the  vengeance  of  death."  x  When, 
ten  years  later,  a  wholesale  Saxon  massacre  of  British 
Christians  occurred,  in  which  possibly  a  thousand 
priests  and  monks  were  slaughtered  and  many  churches 
and  monasteries  destroyed,  further  conferences  were 
at  an  end  for  fifty  years. 

It  was  not  until  664  that  the  famous  Council  of 
Whitby  was  called  by  King  Oswy  of  Northumbria  in 
which  Bishop  Colman  and  Bishop  Cedd,  renowned 
Celtic  divines,  defended  the  British  Church;  while  4 
Bishop  Agilbert,  and  Wilfred,  the  greatest  English 
ecclesiastic  of  his  time,  championed  Rome.  In  the 
discussion  about  the  correct  day  for  Easter,  it  was 
asserted  by  Wilfred  that  St.  Peter  held  "the  keys 
to  the  kingdom  of  Heaven."  The  king  then  asked 
Colman  and  the  monks  with  him  whether  that  was 
true,  and  they  were  forced  to  confess  that  it  was. 
Consequently,  feeling  that  it  was  safer  to  be  on  the 
side  of  Peter,  the  "doorkeeper,"  the  king  decided 
in  favour  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  2  This  was  a  very 
significant  victory  for  the  See  of  St.  Peter,  because 
papal  supremacy*  was  now  recognised  in  the  British 
Isles,  and  likewise  for  the  future  of  England,  because 
it  opened  up  a  channel  through  which  Roman  Christian 
civilisation  flowed  into  the  British  Isles  to  influence 
to  a  greater  or  less  degree  every  institution  in  that 
country  and,  later,  through  the  great  empire  which 
England  was  to  build  up  to  carry  those  cultural  in- 
fluences around  the  world.  The  work  of  cementing  the 
Latin  and  Celtic  churches  in  England  into  one  was 
completed  by  Theodorus,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 

1  Bede,  ii.,  2. 

2  Ibid.,  iii.,  25,  26. 


240     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


(d.  690) ,  and  the  Venerable  Bede  (d.  735) .  Ecclesiasti- 
cal unity  hastened  political  unity  in  England1  and 
developed  a  common  civic  life  among  the  divided 
peoples  of  the  British  Isles.2 

Christianity  had  early  spread  from  Britain  to  Ireland. 
The  labours  of  St.  Patricks  (d.  493)  and  the  work  of 
St.  Bridget,  the  "Mary  of  Ireland"  (d.  525),  have 
become  classics.  The  Anglo-Saxon  invasion  drove 
many  Christians  to  Ireland  in  the  fifth  and  sixth 
centuries,  so  that  by  the  seventh  century  Ireland  had 
become  the  "Island  of  Saints"  and  the  whole  island 
was  Christianised.  Many  famous  monasteries  were 
planted,  and  an  intense  missionary  zeal  had  sent  to 
Scotland,  North  Britain,  4  France,  Germany,  Switzer- 
land, and  northern  Italy  many  representatives  of  the 
Celtic  Church. 

In  629,  Pope  Honorius  exhorted  the  Irish  Church 
to  conform  to  the  Roman  Easter  day.  A  Celtic 
deputation  was  then  sent  to  Rome  and,  upon  returning 
home,  reported  in  favour  of  the  Latin  system,  which 
was  adopted  first  in  southern  Ireland  in  632,  then  in 
northern  Ireland  in  640,  and  by  704    was  generally 

»  Greene,  Short  Hist,  of  Eng.  People,  ch.  1,  §1.  Cf.  Love,  Early 
Eng.  Ch.  Hist.,  Lond.,  1893,  p.  94. 

2  Hunt,  Eng.  Ch.  in  M.  A.,  Lond.,  1889;  Ingram,  Eng.  and 
Rome,  Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  1892;  Newell,  Hist,  of  Anc.  Brit.  Ch., 
Lond.,  1887;  Alexander,  The  Anc.  Brit.  Ch.,  Lond.,  1889;  Cathcart, 
The  Anc.  Brit,  and  Irish  Churches,  Phil.,  1893;  Soames,  The  Lot. 
Ch.  during  Anglo-Sax.  Times,  Lond.,  1848. 

3  Todd,  St.  Patrick  the  Apostle  of  Ireland,  Dub.,  1864;  Sherman, 
Loca  Patriciana;  Wright,  The  Writings  of  St.  Patrick,  Lond.,  1889, 
2d  ed.,  1894;  Stokes,  Tripartite  Life  of  St.  Patrick,  Lond.,  1887; 
Cusack,  Life  of  St.  Patrick;  De  Vinne,  Hist,  of  Irish  Prim.  Ch.,  N.  Y., 
1870;  Killen,  Eccl.  Hist,  of  Ire.,  Lond.,  1875;  Stokes,  Ireland  and 
the  Celtic  Ch.,  Lond.,  1886;  Olden,  The  Ch.  of  Ireland,  Lond.,  1892; 
Sanderson,  St.  Patrick  and  the  Irish  Ch.,  N.  Y.,  1895. 

1  Bede,  iii.,  13,  19,  21. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     241 


observed.  The  Norman  Conquest,  in  1066,  made  the 
union  of  Ireland  with  Rome  as  well  as  with  England 
more  complete;  but  it  was  left  to  Henry  II.,  who 
conquered  Ireland  in  1171,  to  give  finality  to  the 
dependence  of  Ireland  on  Rome  religiously  and  on 
England  politically. 

Christianity  was  planted  in  Scotland  during  the 
Roman  period.1  An  Irish  colony,  converted  by  St. 
Patrick,  settled  there  in  the  fifth  century.  The  labours 
of  St.  Ninian  (sixth  cent.),  the  work  of  St.  Kentigern 
(d.  603),  and  the  activity  of  St.  Columba  (d.  597) 
completed  the  conversion  of  the  country.  St.  Columba 
was  a  famous  Irish  missionary,  who  went  to  Scotland 
in  563,  there  converted  the  king  of  the  Picts  and  founded 
many  churches.  He  made  his  headquarters  on  the 
small  island  of  Iona  on  which  was  planted  a  monastery 
famous  as  a  school  for  missionaries,  as  the  centre  of 
educational  activity,  and  as  the  Rome  of  the  Celtic 
Church. 2  For  centuries  the  Celtic  Church  maintained 
its  independence  in  Scotland,  but  gradually  gave 
way  to  the  better  organised  and  more  aggressive 
Roman  Church,  though  the  Culdees  were  not  absorbed 
until  1332.3 

The  enthusiasm  of  the  Celtic  and  English  Christians 
soon   attained    such   proportions    that   it   overflowed 

1  Haddon  and  Stubbs,  ii.,  103;  Forbes,  The  Kalendars  of  Scottish 
Saints;  Robertson,  Statuta  Ecclesia  Scoticanee;  Cunningham,  Ch. 
Hist,  of  Scot.;  McLaughlin,  The  Early  Scot.  Ch.;  Reeves,  Life  of  St. 
Columba;  Skene,  Keltic  Scot. 

2  Adamnan,  Life  of  St.  Columba  (ed.  by  Reeves  and  Skene) ; 
Smith,  Columba;  Duke  of  Argyle,  Iona;  Montalemb.,  iii.,  99;  Transl. 
and  Reprints,  ii.,  No.  7;  Skene,  ii.,  52. 

3  Calderwood,  Hist,  of  Kirk  of  Scot.,  Edinb.,  1842-49,  8  vols.; 
Gordon,  Eccl.  Chron.  for  Scot.,  Glasg.,  1867,  4  vols.;  Lightfoot, 
Leaders  in  the  Northern  Ch.,  Lond.,  1890;  Dowden,  The  Celtic  Ch.  in 
Scot.,  Lond.,  1894. 

16 


242     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  swept  back  upon  the  continent  like  a  mighty- 
tidal  wave.  The  great  pioneer  in  that  movement 
was  Columbanus.  He  was  born  in  Leinster  about  543 
and  received  his  monastic  education  at  Bangor.  At 
the  age  of  forty  he  conceived  the  idea  of  preaching  the 
Gospel  to  the  pagan  German  tribes.  With  twelve 
young  companions  he  crossed  over  to  France  where 
they  remained  several  years,  teaching  the  faith.  Then 
they  went  to  Burgundy  where  King  Gontran  persuaded 
them  to  build  a  monastery.  For  twenty  years  Colum- 
banus laboured  in  the  wild  Vosges  Mountains,  planted 
the  three  famous  monasteries  of  Anegray,  Luxeuil, 
and  Fontaines.  Luxeuil  virtually  became  the  "mon- 
astic capital  of  France."  1  He  gave  his  monks  a  stringent 
rule,  borrowed  from  the  rigid  discipline  of  the  Celtic 
monasteries,  and  he  clung  to  the  peculiar  rites  and 
usages  of  his  mother  Church.  His  influence  was 
strongly  felt  and  an  army  of  disciples  gathered  around 
him.  From  his  mountain  home  he  sent  forth  re- 
formatory waves  that  covered  all  Europe,  and  posed 
as  sort  of  a  spiritual  dictator  of  the  whole  Church. 

Another  result  of  his  influence  was  to  incite  the 
enmity  of  the  Gallican  clergy  and  the  Burgundian 
court.  In  602,  he  was  arraigned  before  a  Frankish 
synod,  but  he  ably  defended  his  life  and  his  beliefs. 
This  affront  led  him  to  appeal  to  Pope  Gregory  the 
Great  in  several  interesting  letters.  At  last,  in  610, 
he  was  banished  from  the  Burgundian  kingdom  never 
to  return.  He  went  to  Tours,  Nantes,  Metz,  up  the 
Rhine  valley,  and  into  Switzerland  where  he  remained 
three  years  engaged  in  active  missionary  work  until 
forced  to  leave  by  Burgundian  influence.  Crossing  the 
Alps  into  Lombardy  he  received  an  honourable  welcome 

1  Montalembert,  ii.,  463. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     243 


from  King  Agilulf  and  was  given  a  site  for  the  cele- 
brated monastery  of  Bobbio  where,  in  615,  he  passed 
away  in  peace.  To  him  must  be  given  the  credit  of 
opening  up  Europe  to  England  and  Ireland  as  an 
excellent  field  for  foreign  missions.1 

Gallus, 2  an  Irish  companion  of  Columbanus,  called 
the  "Apostle  of  Switzerland,"  laboured  among  the 
Alemanni  and  Swabians.  His  monastery  of  St.  Gall 
became  one  of  the  great  centres  of  learning  in  the 
Middle  Ages.  He  died  in  645.  Three  other  Irish 
monks  of  note  worked  in  Germany.  Fridolin  founded 
a  monastery  on  the  Rhine  near  Basle.  Trudbert 
went  into  the  Black  Forest  and  became  a  martyr  to 
the  cause.  Kylian,  the  "Apostle  of  Franconia,"  went 
to  Wurzburg  where  he  met  with  considerable  success 
but  lost  his  life. 

The  English  were  early  drawn  into  this  ardent 
missionary  impulse.  More  missionaries  were  sent  to 
Europe  in  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries  from 
England  than  go  to-day  to  foreign  fields.  3  Willibrord, 4 
a  native  of  Northumberland,  educated  in  Ireland, 
embarked  in  690  with  seven  assistants  for  Frisia  at 
the  mouth  of  the  Rhine.  The  native  prince  was 
Radbod,  an  uncompromising  pagan.  Acting  on  the 
advice  of  Pepin  of  France  he  went  to  Rome  and  was 
invested  with  the  bishopric  of  Utrecht.  He  then 
evangelised  parts  of  Frankish  Frisia,  after  which  he 
visited  Denmark.  After  a  zealous  career  of  half  a 
century  he  died  in  740.  Other  Englishmen  followed 
in  his  wake.     Adelbert  laboured  in  the  north  of  Holland, 

»  Univ.  of  Pa.,  Transl.  and  Rep.,  ii.,  No.  7 ;  see  Maclear,  Apostles 
of  Med.  Europe,  57-72.     His  life  and  works  are  in  Migne,  vol.  80. 

2  Migne,  vol.  113.     See  Diet,  of  Christ.  Biog. 

3  Smith,  Medieval  Missions,  112. 

4  Migne,  vol.  101.     See  Diet,  of  Christ.  Biog. 


2  44    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Werenfrid  near  Elste,  and  Wiro  among  the  natives  of 
Guldres.  The  Ewald  brothers  were  slain  by  the 
savage  Saxons. 1  Wulfram,  the  Bishop  of  Sens,  made 
excellent  headway  among  Radbod's  Frisians.2  In- 
deed the  zeal  of  these  northern  missionaries  might 
have  planted  the  Celtic  Church  firmly  on  the  continent, 
had  they  not  been  so  sadly  deficient  in  capacity  for 
organisation  and  had  the  Pope  of  Rome  not  been  so 
zealously  watchful. 

Roman  colonies  on  the  Rhine  in  the  third  and  fourth 
centuries  first  carried  Christianity  into  Germany.  In 
the  Council  of  Aries  (3 1 4)  there  were  present  a  bishop 
and  a  deacon  from  Cologne,  and  a  bishop  from  Treves. 
By  the  fifth  century  Christianity  had  been  spread  by 
Severinus,3  an  Italian  monk,  into  Bavaria  along  the 
Danube. 

It  was  really  left  to  St.  Boniface,  4  the  "  Apostle  of 
Germany,"  to  organise  and  unify  the  work  already 
done,  and  to  subject  the  Christian  Church  in  Germany 
planted  by  his  predecessors,  to  Rome.  He  was  a 
most  remarkable  character  and  played  an  important 
part  in  the  Christianisation  of  the  Teutonic  peoples. 
Born  in  680  in  Devonshire,  England,  of  noble  Saxon 
family,  he  early  entered  the  monastery  at  Exeter, 
where  he  received  an  excellent  education  for  that  day. 
He  soon  evinced  a  longing  for  the  life  of  a  monk.  His 
father  gave  his  consent  reluctantly,  and  he  assumed 
monastic    vows    in    a    monastery    near    Winchester. 

1  Bede,  v.,  10. 

2  Mabillon,  iii.,  341-348;  Maclear,  Apostles  of  Med.  Europe,  104— 
109. 

3  See  Diet,  of  Christ.  Biog. 

4  His  original  name  was  Winfried.  At  the  wish  of  Pope  Gregory 
II.  he  changed  it  to  Boniface  in  723.  See  Cox,  Life  of  Boniface, 
Lond.,  1853;  Hope,  Boniface,  Lond.,  1872. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     245 


He  became  a  famous  preacher  and « expounder  of 
Scripture,  and  at  the  age  of  thirty  was  ordained  priest- 
He  now  felt  called  upon  to  carry  the  Gospel  to  the  land 
of  his  ancestors.  Consequently  in  716,  with  two  or 
three  fellow-monks  as  companions,  he  crossed  from 
London  to  Frisia  to  begin  his  missionary  labours  as  the 
successor  of  Willibrord,  whose  successes  had  been 
largely  reversed.  Radbod,  the  baptised  Frisian  king, 
had  backslid  when  he  learned  that  his  pagan  fore- 
fathers were  among  the  damned.  He  declared  that 
he  preferred  "to  be  there  with  his  ancestors  rather  than 
in  heaven  with  a  handful  of  beggars."  1  Hence  he  had 
devastated  the  Christian  churches  and  monasteries, 
and  was  now  at  war  with  Charles  Martel.  King  Rad- 
bod met  Boniface,  but  refused  to  permit  him  to  preach, 
so  Boniface  returned  to  England  without  having  ac- 
complished anything. 

Notwithstanding  the  failure  of  this  first  enterprise, 

Boniface  left  England  again  in  718  and  for  ever;  and 

now  went  through  France  to  Rome  to  obtain  papal 

sanction  for  his  future  missionary  work.     Pope  Gregory 

II.  formally  commissioned  him  as  missionary  to  the 

German  tribes   (719).     Armed  with  that  letter  and 

t:  many  precious  relics,  he  started  north  the  following 

spring  to  his  field  of  labour.     First,  he  went  to  Thu- 

}       ,    ringia  and  Bavaria,  regions  already  partly  Christian- 

'L        ised,  but  at  this  time  considerably  disorganised,  and 

,  £<-    demanded  their    submission    to   Rome;   then,   learn- 

l    ing  of   King  Radbod's   death   (719),   he  hastened  to 

■1  "        Frisia,  where  he  laboured  for  three  years  with  Wil- 

/uz*^  librord,  who  had  meantime  returned  to  continue  his 

Yfr  '  Discredited  by  Rettberg,  Kircheng.  Deutschl.,  ii.,  514.    Mabillon, 

iii.,  341,  gives  an  interpolated  life.     See  Maclear,  Apostles  of  Med. 
tfjjts^  Europe,  104. 


246     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


labours.  In  722  he  passed  through  Thuringia  and 
entered  Hesse  where,  within  a  short  time,  he  con- 
verted two  local  chiefs  together  with  many  thousands 
of  their  followers.  A  foothold  was  thus  secured  by- 
Rome  in  the  pagan  world  of  Germany  and  never  again 
lost. 

These  successes  led  the  Pope  to  recall  Boniface 
to  Rome  to  receive  directions  concerning  conditions 
in  Germany.  After  exacting  from  him  a  confession 
of  faith  in  the  Trinity,  and  binding  him  by  an  oath 
ever  to  respect  papal  authority,1  the  Supreme  Pontiff 
created  him  missionary  bishop  in  723.  Boniface  then 
returned  to  Germany  with  a  code  of  laws  for  the  Church, 
and  with  letters  of  introduction  to  Charles  Martel  and 
to  other  influential  persons  who  might  aid  him.  He 
was  aware  that  little  could  be  done  without  the  assist- 
ance of  that  powerful  ruler  and  wrote:  "Without  the 
protection  of  the  Prince  of  the  Franks,  I  could  neither 
rule  the  people  of  the  Church,  nor  defend  the  priests  or 
clerks,  the  monks  or  handmaidens  of  God ;  nor  have  I 
the  power  to  restrain  pagan  rites  and  idolatry  in  Ger- 
many without  his  mandate  and  the  awe  of  his  name."  2 
Hence  he  attached  himself  for  awhile  to  the  court  of 
the  Frankish  ruler  before  he  began  the  work  so  near 
his  heart.  Hesse  and  Thuringia,  Christianised  nomi- 
nally by  Celtic  missionaries  and  consequently  under  no 
episcopal  authority,  refused  to  recognise  papal  juris- 
diction. To  awe  them  into  submission,  Boniface  cut 
down  their  gigantic  sacred  oak  at  Geismar  and  from 
it,  subsequently,  built  a  chapel  to  St.  Peter.  The 
people  were  convinced  and  received  the  new   faith. 

1  This  oath  was  similar  to  that  taken  by  Italian  bishops.     Nean- 
der,  v.,  64-67. 

2  Jaffe,  Mon.  Magunt.,  157. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     2  47 


With  the  aid  of  Charles  Martel,  the  assistance  of  the 
Pope,  and  the  help  of  English  missionaries  who  joined 
him,  Boniface  completed  his  conquest  of  that  region, 
filled  it  with  churches  and  monasteries,  and  extended 
papal  rule  over  it.  Schools  were  established,  learn- 
ing and  a  higher  civilisation  began  to  flow  in  from 
England  and  Rome,  and  the  dark  days  of  paganism 
were  gone. 

As  a  reward  for  his  labours,  Pope  Gregory  III.,  who 
received  the  papal  crown  in  731,  raised  Boniface  in 
732  to  the  dignity  of  missionary  archbishop.  This 
new  authority  enabled  him  to  coerce  refractory  bishops 
who  thwarted  his  efforts.  Five  years  later,  Boniface 
made  his  third  and  last  visit  to  Rome,  not  now  as  an 
obscure  missionary  but  with  a  great  retinue  of  monks 
and  converts.  Once  more  returning  to  Germany  with 
authority,  he  organised  the  Church  in  Bavaria  (739) 
and  thus  curtailed  ecclesiastical  lawlessness  by  creating 
four  bishoprics:  Salzburg,  Friesingen,  Passau,  and 
Regensburg.  In  the  year  742,  continuing  the  work  of 
organisation  begun  so  well  in  Bavaria,  he  succeeded 
in  creating  in  central  Germany  the  bishoprics  of 
Wurzburg,  Buraburg,  Erfurt,  and  Eichstadt.  To 
organise  the  Church  and  regulate  ecclesiastical  affairs, 
he  held  numerous  synods.  At  the  same  time,  he 
laboured  hard  to  enforce  celibacy,  to  restore  Church 
property  alienated  by  rulers,  and  to  suppress  heresy. 
In  743,  he  was  made  archbishop  of  Mainz,  with  juris- 
diction over  a  region  from  Cologne  to  Strassburg  and 
from  Coire  to  Worms,  and  now  sought  to  complete  the 
work  of  consolidating  the  German  Church.  By  this 
time,  he  had  become  not  only  the  head  of  the  Church 
in  Germany,  but  was  recognised  as  a  powerful  factor  in 
political  matters.     It  is  even  reported  that  he  crowned 


248     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Pepin  at  Soissons  (752). 1  The  great  monastery  of 
Fulda  was  founded  (744)  and  it  was  destined  to  be- 
come the  head  of  the  Benedictine  institutions  in  Ger- 
many. Having  appointed  Lull  as  his  successor  at 
Mainz,  he  resigned  in  754,  returned  a  third  time  to 
Frisia  as  a  missionary,  and  there  was  slain  in  755  as 
a  martyr  to  the  Christian  cause.  Boniface  did  more 
than  any  other  one  individual  to  carry  Christianity 
to  the  German  peoples  and  to  tie  the  Church  of  Germany 
firmly  to  the  papal  throne.  He  was  a  civiliser  and 
law-giver  as  well  as  a  Roman  missionary. 2  After  the 
Apostle  Paul  he  was  probably  the  most  eminent  in 
missionary  endeavour. 

His  work  was  continued  by  his  disciple  Willibald 
(b.  700),  a  relative,  a  pilgrim  to  Rome  and  the  Holy 
Land,  and  a  Benedictine  monk,  who  was  made  bishop 
of  Eichstadt  (741).  He  called  his  brother,  sister,  and 
others  from  England  as  missionaries  into  Germany.  He 
founded  Benedictine  monasteries,  and  it  is  thought  by 
some  that  he  wrote  a  biography  of  his  great  leader  (d. 
781).  Gregory,  an  abbot  of  Utrecht,  a  Merovingian 
prince  converted  by  Boniface,  worked  with  his  master 
and  took  charge  of  the  Frisian  mission  after  his  death 
(755).  Sturm,  the  first  abbot  of  Fulda  (710-779), 3 
a  Bavarian  nobleman  educated  by  Boniface,  had  his 
teacher's  bones  buried  at  Fulda  and  served  for  years 
as  a  missionary  among  the  Saxons  (d.  779).  Charles 
the  Great  gave  him  support  and  encouragement. 

1  Rettberg  and  modern  scholars  deny  the  tradition. 

2  J.  A.  Giles  edited  the  works  of  Boniface  in  2  vols.,  in  1844. 
His  disciple  Willibald  of  Mainz  wrote  his  life.  Pertz,  Mon.,  ii.,  33. 
Maclear,  Apostles  of  Med.  Europe,  ch.  8.  One  of  his  sermons,  on 
"Faith  and  the  works  of  love,"  is  given  in  translation  in  Neale, 
Mediceval  Preachers. 

3  A  famous  monastery  founded  by  Boniface. 


I 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     249 

Another  means  used  to  convert  the  Germans  was  the 
sword.  This  was  especially  true  of  the  Saxons,  a 
sturdy,  defiant,  warlike  people,  who  lived  in  Hanover, 
Oldenburg,  and  Westphalia.1  They  were  the  last  to 
accept  Christianity,  because  they  hated  the  Franks 
and  far-off  Rome.  Fruitless  efforts  to  convert  them 
had  been  made  by  the  Ewald  brothers,  Suidbert,  and 
others.  The  work  was  left,  however,  for  Charles  the 
Great,  who  consumed  thirty-three  years  in  subjecting 
them  to  Christian  rule  (772-805)  .2  This  was  done  only 
after  five  thousand  inhabitants  had  been  massacred  at 
Verdun,  ten  thousand  families  had  been  exiled  in  804, 
and  bloody  laws  were  enacted  against  relapse  into 
paganism.  This  new  type  of  missionary  work,  which 
was  a  radical  departure  from  the  apostolic  method, 
can  be  excused,  perhaps,  only  when  we  take  into  con- 
sideration the  moral  standards  of  the  age  and  the 
motives  of  Charles  the  Great.  The  best  men  of  the 
time,  however,  like  Alcuin  vehemently  opposed  this 
method.  After  Charles  had  subjected  the  Saxons,  he 
established  among  them  eight  bishoprics,  Osnabriick, 
Minister,  Minden,  Paderborn,  Verdun,  Bremen,  Hildes- 
heim,  and  Halberstadt. 

The  Prussians,  located  to  the  north-eastward  of  the 
Saxons  along  the  Baltic,  stubbornly  resisted  efforts  to 
Christianise  them.  Adelbert,  Bishop  of  Prague  (997), 
and  his  successor,  Bruno,  were  both  massacred  by 
them.  At  length,  a  Cistercian  monk,  who  was  appointed 
the  first  bishop  of  Prussia  in  the  twelfth  century, 
made  some  headway  among  them,  but  was  soon  com- 
pelled to  withdraw.     Then  followed  the  crusade  of  the 

1  Bede,  v.,  10. 

2  In  785,  two  of  the  most  powerful  Saxon  chiefs,  Wittekind  and 
Abbio,  submitted  to  baptism  with  Charles  the  Great  as  sponsor. 


250    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Teutonic  Order  (1 230-1 280)  in  which  the  methods 
of  Charles  the  Great  were  employed  and  with  the 
same  results. 

Christianity  was  first  introduced  into  Denmark  in  the 
sixth  and  seventh  centuries  through  raids  on  Ireland, 
commerce  with  Holland,  and  the  story  of  the  "white 
Christ."  Willibrord  was  the  first  missionary.1  When 
he  was  expelled  from  Friesland  in  700  he  went  to 
Denmark,  where  he  was  received  with  favour  by  King 
Yngrin,  organised  a  church,  and  bought  thirty  boys 
to  be  educated  as  missionaries.  St.  Sebaldus,2  the 
son  of  a  Danish  king,  was  a  product  of  this  early 
missionary  effort.  Charles  the  Great  ruled  part  of 
Denmark,  carried  on  extensive  trade  with  the  people, 
located  churches  in  Holstein  and  at  Hamburg,  and 
planned  to  convert  all  the  Danes.3  Louis  the  Pious, 
appealed  to  by  King  Harold  Klak*  to  settle  a  family 
feud,  sent  Archbishop  Ebo  of  Rheims  and  Bishop 
Halitgar  of  Cambray  to  Denmark  in  822.  Ebo  made 
several  journeys,  later  preached  extensively,  won  many 
converts,  baptised  them,  and  built  a  church  at  Welnau. 
When,  in  826,  King  Harold  Klak  fled  to  the  Emperor  for 
aid,  he,  together  with  his  whole  family  and  train,  was 
converted  and  baptised  at  Ingelheim.  Upon  returning, 
the  King  took  with  him  Ansgar,  a  Frank  born  at  Amiens 
(800),  who  had  been  early  trained  as  a  missionary 
teacher  and  preacher,  and  who  was  to  win  the  title  of 
"Apostle  of  the  North."  He  laboured  in  Denmark  with 
some  success,  but  in  829  was  expelled,  when  Harold 
Klak  was  once  more  driven  out,  and  went  to  Sweden 

1  Bede,  v. 

2  The  patron  saint  of  Nuremberg. 

3  Jaffe\  Mon.  Ale,  Ep.  13. 

*  Denmark  at  this  time  was  divided  into  many  petty  kingdoms. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     251 


until  he  was  elected  bishop  of  Hamburg  in  83 1  with  all 
Scandinavia  as  his  see.  In  846,  Bremen  was  united 
to  Hamburg  and  Ansgar  was  made  archbishop.  He 
soon  succeeded  in  planting  Christianity  and  with  it 
monasticism  in  Denmark.  His  successor,  Archbishop 
Rimbert  (865-888) ,  continued  the  spread  of  Christianity 
undisturbed ;  and  his  successors  Adalgar  (888-909) , 
Unni  (909-936),  and  Adaldag  (936-988),  had  a  com- 
paratively clear  field.  The  last  of  these  saw  the  conse- 
cration of  four  native  bishops,  an  increase  in  the 
possessions  of  the  Church,  and  an  organised  struggle 
against  heathenism.  When  the  Danes  made  a  con- 
quest of  England,  the  results  were  seen  in  the  con- 
version of  King  Swen,  a  zealous  worker  for  the  Church, 
and  his  son  Canute  (1019-1035),  who  completed  his 
father's  work  with  the  aid  of  English  missionaries. 
So  strong  was  the  Church  in  Denmark  by  the  twelfth 
century  that  a  separate  archbishop  was  appointed. 
The  supremacy  of  the  Roman  Church  was  recognised. 
The  conversion  of  the  Northmen  has  an  interesting 
history. 1  The  political  situation  in  the  tenth  century 
opened  the  way  for  the  introduction  of  Christianity. 
Hakon  the  Good,  educated  in  England  as  a  Christian, 
conquered  and  united  all  Norway,  converted  his 
followers,  called  over  priests  from  England,  and  sought 
to  force  Christianity  upon  all  his  people,  but  in  this 
failed.  The  sons  of  Eric,  also  Christianised  in  England, 
wrested  the  throne  from  Hakon  the  Good  in  961,  and 
likewise  tried  to  uproot  paganism,  but  they,  too,  were 
unsuccessful.  Olaf,  of  romantic  career,  was  called  in 
995  to  rule.  He,  likewise,  waged  a  crusade  in  behalf 
of  Christianity  and  with  such  success  that  when  he 

1  Maclear,  The  Conversion  of  the  Northmen,     Merivale,  Conversion 
of  the  Northern  Nations. 


252     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


died  in  1000,  it  had  been  permanently  established. 
Olaf  the  Saint  (1014-1030),  however,  completed  the 
Christianisation  of  Norway  and  put  it  under  the 
protection  of  the  Archbishop  of  Bremen-Ham- 
burg.1 

As  early  as  the  eighth  century,  Culdee  anchorites 
were  accustomed  to  retire  to  Iceland  from  Scotland. 
In  the  ninth  century  Norwegians  began  to  flee  thither 
from  the  tyranny  of  their  kings.  Most  of  these  emi- 
grants were  pagans,  but  one  Norwegian  convert  in 
Saxony  persuaded  Bishop  Frederick  to  go  with  him 
to  Iceland  where  the  bishop  remained  four  years,  but 
made  little  impression.  Thougbrand  journeyed  thither 
in  the  tenth  century,  but  likewise  largely  failed  in  his 
efforts.  After  the  conversion  of  Norway,  however,  the 
intimate  relations  with  Iceland  soon  produced  different 
results.  Christianity  spread  so  rapidly  that  in  1000 
the  Christian  religion  was  made  the  state  religion.  The 
first  church  built  on  the  island  was  from  timber  sent 
by  Olaf  the  Saint. 2 

Greenland  was  discovered  and  colonised  by  the  bold 
Icelander,  Eric  the  Red,  in  986,  and  Eric's  son  was 
sent  over  by  Olaf  to  plant  the  Christian  Church  there 
in  1000.  The  Church  flourished  there  for  four  hundred 
years  until  disrupted  by  the  Esquimos.  About  the 
year  1000  Vinland  was  discovered  and  thus  the  Gospel 

»  Hermskringla :  Chronicle  of  the  Norse  Kings.  Tr .  by  Laing,  Lond . , 
1844,  rev.  ed.  by  Anderson,  Lond.,  1889,  4  vols.  Also  tr.  by  Morris 
and  Magnusson,  Lond.,  1891,  2  vols.  New  ed.  by  York  Powell. 
See  Carlyle,  The  Early  Kings  of  Norway,  Lond.,  1875,  and  Boyesen, 
The  Story  of  Norway,  N.  Y.  and  Lond.,  new  ed.,  1890. 

2  The  complete  record  of  these  early  days  is  given  in  the  Biskupa 
Sogar,  ed.  by  Prof.  Vigfusson,  and  pub.  by  the  Icelandic  Lit.  Soc, 
2  vols.,  1858-61.  See  Elton,  Life  of  Laurence,  Bishop  of  Halar, 
Lond.,  1890;  Maccall,  The  Story  of  Iceland,  Lond.,  1887. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     253 

was  known  on  the  coast  of  New  England  five  centuries 
before  Columbus  appeared.1 

Like  the  Danes,  the  Swedes  learned  of  Christianity- 
through  wars  and  conquests,  and  commercial  relations. 
Bjorn,  the  Swedish  King,  asked  Louis  the  Pious  to  send 
him  Christian  missionaries.  Accordingly  in  8  2  9  Ansgar, 
expelled  from  Denmark,  went  to  Sweden  where  he 
laboured  two  years  with  some  success.  Five  years 
later  he  sent  Gautbert  and  Nithard  to  Sweden  with  a 
number  of  priests,  but  the  pagan  uprising  killed  all  the 
priests  and  soon  swept  away  all  traces  of  Christianity. 
In  848  Ansgar  made  a  pompous  visit  to  Sweden  again 
with  costly  presents  and  letters,  and  reopened  the 
field  for  missionary  work.  By  the  eleventh  century, 
the  King  of  Sweden  and  his  sons  were  baptised,  and 
the  work  was  pushed  with  renewed  vigour,  although 
it  was  not  until  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century 
that  the  conversion  of  Sweden  was  completed. 

In  the  time  of  Charles  the  Great,  the  Slavs  were 
located  along  the  eastern  side  of  his  Empire ;  the  Wends 
along  the  Baltic  Sea  between  the  Elba  and  the  Vistula ; 
the  Poles  along  the  Vistula;  the  Russians  behind  the 
Poles ;  the  Czechs  in  Bohemia ;  and  the  Bulgarians  back  of 
the  Danube  and  Balkan  Mountains.  Charles  the  Great 
had  attempted  to  force  the  Wends  to  accept  Christ- 
ianity, but  with  no  success.  Otto  the  Great  conquered 
them  and  likewise  sought  to  convert  them.  He  located 
bishoprics  at  Havelburg,  Oldenburg,  Meissen,  Merse- 
burg,  and  Zeitz,  and  an  archbishopric  at  Magdeburg 
in  968  with  Adalbert  as  the  first  archbishop.  Reaction 
began  in  the  time  of  Otto  II.,  under  the  leadership 
of  Mistiwoi,  an  apostate  Christian,  in  which  churches 
and  monasteries  were  burned,  and  priests  and  monks 

1  See  Winsor,  Nar.  and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Am.,  i. 


254      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


killed  (983). 1  Later,  Gottschalk,  his  grandson,  an 
educated  Christian  monk,  angered  at  the  murder  of  his 
father  (1032),  led  an  anti -Christian  crusade,  but  was 
defeated  and  then  repented  and  ever  after  laboured 
hard  to  establish  Christianity.  The  old  bishoprics 
were  restored  and  new  ones  created  at  Razzeburg 
and  Mecklenburg ;  five  monasteries  were  built ;  mission- 
ary work  was  encouraged ;  the  liturgy  was  translated 
into  Slavic ;  and  the  Church  in  that  region  became 
wealthy  and  powerful.  But  the  heathen  party,  in  a 
general  uprising,  killed  Gottschalk  and  his  old  teacher 
(1066),  destroyed  the  churches  and  monasteries,  and 
once  more  slew  the  priests  and  monks.  The  final 
Christianisation  of  the  Wends,  therefore,  did  not  take 
place  until  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century. 

Charles  the  Great  subjugated  the  Moravians,  directed 
the  Bishop  of  Passau  to  establish  a  mission  among  them, 
secured  the  conversion  of  their  chief,  Moymir,  and 
founded  the  bishoprics  of  Olmutz  and  Nitra.  Louis 
the  German  deposed  Moymir  on  suspicion  of  treason 
and  elevated  Radislaw  to  power,  but  he  soon  turned 
against  his  benefactor  and  defeated  him,  formed  an 
independent  Slavic  kingdom  on  the  eastern  boundary  of 
Germany,  and  sent  for  Greek  missionaries,  two  of  whom, 
Cyrillus  and  Methodius,  brothers  and  educated  monks, 
were  sent  by  the  Greek  Emperor  Michael  III.  in  863. 2 
Cyrillus  understood  the  Slavic  tongue  and  invented  an 
alphabet  and  translated  the  liturgy  into  Slavic.  He 
preached  and  celebrated  service  in  the  language  of 
the  people,  and  had  a  most  able  assistant  in  Methodius. 

•  Seized  with  remorse  Mistiwoi  tried  to  make  amends,  but  his 
subjects  abandoned  him.  He  passed  the  remaining  days  of  his  life 
in  a  Christian  monastery. 

2  Tozer,  The  Ch.  and  the  East.  Emp.,  ch.  7. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     255 

They  were  very  successful  in  their  labours  and  built 
up  a  national  Slavic  Church.  The  German  priests 
who  had  been  labouring  there  for  some  time  were 
driven  out,  and  with  them  disappeared  the  Latin 
liturgy.  Seeing  their  great  success,  Pope  Nicholas  I., 
in  868,  invited  them  to  Rome  and  won  them  to  a  friendly 
arrangement.  There  Cyrillus  died  in  869  but  Methodius 
was  returned  as  the  Roman  Archbishop  of  Pannonia. 
The  Pope  agreed  both  to  the  use  of  Slavic  in  the  mass 
and  to  the  independence  of  the  Slavic  Church  under 
papal  control.  Ten  years  later  Methodius  made  a  second 
visit  to  Rome  and  a  second  agreement  was  entered  into, 
satisfactory  to  both  Rome  and  Moravia.  He  died 
before  the  ninth  century  ended,  and  before  the  close 
of  the  tenth  century  the  Latin  Church  had  replaced  the 
Slavic.  The  expelled  Slavic  priests  fled  to  Bulgaria  to 
build  up  a  new  Church. 

Neither  Charles  the  Great,  nor  his  son  Louis,  was  able 
to  conquer  the  Bohemians.  When  Bohemia  became 
a  dependency  of  Moravia,  however,  the  way  was  opened 
for  the  introduction  of  Christianity.  The  Bohemian 
Duke  Borziway  and  his  family  were  converted,  but 
reaction  followed  under  Boleslav  the  Cruel.  Otto  I. 
in  950  completely  defeated  Boleslav,  recalled  the 
priests,  and  rebuilt  the  churches.  The  bishopric  of 
Prague  was  established  in  973,  and  under  Archbishop 
Severus  (1083)  general  laws  were  enforced  concerning 
Christian  marriage,  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  and 
morality.  The  Latin  language  and  the  Roman  ritual 
prevailed  in  the  Bohemian  Church.1 

The  first  missionaries  to  Poland  were  Slavic,  perhaps 

1  There  are  practically  no  original  sources  in  English  concerning 
the  Slavic  missions.  Pelzel  and  Dabrowsky,  Rerum  Bohemic. 
Scriptores,  contains  most  of  the  documents. 


256      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Cyrillus  and  Methodius.     With  the  break-up  of  the 
Moravian  kingdom,  many  nobles  and  priests  fled  to 
Poland  and  were  kindly  received.      In  965  a  Bohemian 
princess  married   Duke   Mieczyslav   and   took  priests 
with  her.    The  Duke  was  converted  and  baptised  and 
paganism  was  destroyed  by  force.     The  Church  was  then 
organised  on  the  Latin-German  model,  and  German 
priests  were  introduced.     The  first   Polish  bishopric 
was  established  at  Posen  subject  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Magdeburg.     But    it  was    to  take  many    additional 
years  before  Roman  Christianity  was  firmly  established. 
The  Bulgarians,  Slavic  in  institutions,    but  not  in 
origin,  captured  Adrianople  in  813  and  carried  away 
many    Christian    prisoners,    among    whom    was    the 
bishop   himself,   who   began   the   conversion   of  their 
captors.     In  861  a  Bulgarian  princess,  returning  from 
captivity  in  Constantinople  as  a  Christian  missionary 
to  her  own  people,  converted  her  brother,  the  Duke 
Bogoris.     This  work  was  supplemented  by  Methodius, 
who  was  sent  there  in  862  to  help  on  the  good  work, 
and  by  other  Greek  missionaries  who  followed  him. 
In  865  the  baptised  Duke  of  Bulgaria  wrote  to  Pope 
Nicholas   I.    for  Roman  missionaries  and   asked   one 
hundred  and  six  questions  about  Christian  doctrines, 
morals,  and  ritual.     The  Pope  sent  two  bishops  and 
elaborate  answers  to  the  questions,1   but  the  Greek 
faith  finally  predominated. 

The  Magyars,  who  entered  Europe  in  the  ninth 
century  and  in  884  settled  near  the  mouth  of  the 
Danube,  finally  located  in  present  Hungary.  They 
first  learned  of  Christianity  at  the  Byzantine  court. 
In   Hungary,    however,    they    came    in    touch    with 

«  Mansi,  Coll.  Concil.,  xv.,  401-434;  Harduin,  Coll.  Concil.,  v., 
353-386. 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     257 

the  Roman  missionaries.  Otto  the  Great  com- 
pelled them  to  receive  missionaries  from  the  Bishop 
of  Passau.  When  Prince  Geyza  married,  a  Christian 
princess,  their  conversion  was  rapid  and  complete. 
Adalbert  of  Prague  visited  the  country  and  made  a 
great  impression.  King  Stephanus  (997)  made  Chris- 
tianity the  legal  religion,  enforced  the  German  eccles- 
iastical system,  formed  ten  bishoprics,  located  an 
archbishopric  at  Grau  on  the  Danube,  built  churches, 
schools,  and  monasteries,  and  received  a  golden  crown 
from  Pope  Sylvester  II.  in  1000  as  "His  Apostolic 
Majesty."  * 

The  Russians  claimed  St.  Andrew  for  their  apostle 
but  probably  actually  learned  of  Christianity  from 
Constantinople  in  the  ninth  century.  Photius,  in 
867,  told  the  Pope  that  the  Russians  were  already 
Christians.  A  church  was  built  at  Kieff  on  the  Dnieper, 
the  Russian  capital,  and  in  955  the  grand -duchess,  Olga, 
journeyed  to  Constantinople  and  was  baptised.  Grand - 
Duke  Vladimir,  the  grandson  of  Olga,  established 
Christianity  at  one  sweep  when  he  married  Anne,  the 
daughter  of  Emperor  Basil  and  was  baptised  at  his 
wedding  in  988.  Churches,  schools,  and  monasteries 
spread  rapidly  all  over  the  country,  but  the  Greek 
Church  instead  of  the  Roman  was  firmly  planted  there, 
and  in  1325,  Moscow  became  the  Russian  Rome.2 

While  the  Roman  Church  was  winning  new  subjects 
all  over  northern  and  central  Europe;  she  was  losing 
nearly  as  much  in  territory  and  numbers  in  Africa  and 

>  Thwrocz,  Chronica  Hungarorum  in  Scriptores  Rerwn  Hungari- 
carum,  Vienna,  1746-8,  i. 

2  The  best  collection  of  sources  is  Stritter,  Memories  populorum 
olitn  ad  Danubium,  etc.,  Petropoli,  1771,  4  vols.;  Karmasin,  Hist, 
of  Rus.;  Mouravieff,  Hist,  of  the  Ch.  of  Rus.,  Oxf.,  1862;  Stanley, 
Lects.  on  the  E.  Ch.,  ix.-xii.,  Lond.,  1862. 


258     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Spain.  This  loss  was  due  to  the  rise  of  a  rival  religion 
in  Arabia  which  bid  fair  to  outstrip  Christianity  in  the 
race  for  world  conquest. 

Mohammedanism,  shortly  after  its  birth  (622),  began 
to  threaten  Christianity.  After  having  driven  the 
Christian  Church  from  northern  Africa,  the  followers  of 
Islam  overthrew  the  Visigothic  power  in  Spain  (711) 
and  then  swarmed  across  the  Pyrenees  to  overrun 
most  of  France.  The  very  existence  of  Christendom 
was  at  stake,  and  the  future  of  Europe  hung  in  the 
sfales  and  might  have  been  very  different,  had  not 
Mharles  Martel  with  his  stalwart  Christian  knights  in 
Pie  bloody  battle  of  Tours  (732)  checked  the  advance 
of  the  crescent  and  forced  its  adherents  to  hastily  retrace 
their  steps._j  The  califate  founded  at  Cordova  (756) 
continued  as  a  standing  menace  for  more  than  six 
centuries.  Meanwhile  Moslem  corsairs  scoured  the 
Mediterranean,  seized  Sicily,  and  from  that  vantage 
point  sought  to  make  a  conquest  of  Italy  venturing, 
at  times  to  the  very  gates  of  Rome. 

The  contest  between  the  faithfulof  these  two  re- 
ligions, continued  for  centuries  and  attained  its  climax 
in  the  crusades.  The  followers  of  each  faith  sought 
to  either  conquer  or  exterminate  the  other.  This 
form  of  missionary  work  was  like  that  employed  by 
Charles  the  Great  against  the  Saxons  and  Otto  the 
Great  against  the  Slavs.  The  repeated  assaults  of 
Frankish  rulers,  Spanish  princes,  and  Norman  warriors 
in  Italy  were  finally  successful  and  Islam  was  thrust 
back  into  Africa,  but  only  to  enter  Europe  by  way 
of  Constantinople. 

In  sharp  contrast  to  these  harsh  methods,  there 
are  not  a  few  instances  of  devout  Christians  labouring 
in  love  among  the  followers  of  the  Prophet  to  save 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe     2  59 


their  souls.  Conversions  to  Christianity  were  not 
infrequent  in  Spain,  Italy,  Egypt,  and  the  East.1 
The  Franciscans  and  Dominicans  both  laboured  heroic- 
ally among  the  followers  of  the  Prophet  to  teach  them 
the  higher  and  better  faith. 2 

Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  Christianity  spread 
so  rapidly  throughout  the  Roman  Empire,  yet  it 
must  be  remembered  that  more  than  twelve  centuries 
were  to  circle  away  before  the  cross  was  carried  to  all 
European  peoples  and  planted  among  them.  The 
problem  was  as  difficult  as  that  encountered  to-day 
in  Africa,  Asia,  and  the  islands  of  the  seas.  By  the 
twelfth  century  all  Europe,  except  Lapland  and 
Lithuania  had  been  won  to  Christianity.  If  the 
number  of  Christians  approximated  30,000,000  at  the 
death  of  Constantine,  the  number  at  the  time  of 
Pope  Innocent  III.  in  1200  may  have  been  200,000,000 
who  came  within  the  direct  or  indirect  jurisdiction  of 
the  Christian  Church.  The  sweeping  control  of  the 
Roman  Church  gathered  under  her  broad  aegis  possibly 
100,200,000.  Through  these  missionary  activities, 
therefore,  the  successor  of  St.  Peter  had  extended  his 
actual  sway  until  it  included  all  of  western  and  central 
Europe  with  a  population  as  large  as  that  of  the  Empire 
of  Caesar  at  the  birth  of  Christ. 

This  unprecedented  increase  in  dominion  and  sub- 
jects carried  with  it  a  corresponding  change  in  the 
power,  duties,  wealth,  and  opportunity  of  the  Papacy. 
The  Pope  of  Rome  became  the  greatest  force  in  the 
West  and   one   of  the   greatest  in  the  world.     The 

1  Muir,  Annals  of  Early  Califate;  Oakley,  Hist,  of  Saracens; 
Cond6,  Dominion  of  Arabs  in  Spain;  Freeman,  Hist,  and  Conquest 
of  Spain. 

2  See  Chap.  xxi. 


260     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


hierarchy  was  necessarily  extended  and  elaborated. 
The  number  of  officers,  both  locally  and  in  the  ecclesi- 
astical court  at  Rome,  was  greatly  increased.  The 
rapid  addition  of  so  many  sturdy  recruits  to  the 
Roman  Church,  carried  on  for  centuries,  gave  the  West- 
ern Church  a  pronounced  ascendency  over  the  East- 
ern Church.  Papal  prerogatives,  which  were  little 
more  than  assertions  in  the  early  period,  became 
realities.  As  a  result  of  these  heroic  and  persistent 
missionary  efforts,  the  mediaeval  Church,  at  the  end 
of  the  missionary  period,  had  attained  its  highest 
power. 

A  stream  is  coloured  and  influenced  in  its  purity 
by  the  soil  and  rock  through  which  it  flows.  An 
institution  is  modified  by  the  peoples  through  whom 
it  passes.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  surprise  to  the  historical 
student,  in  consequence,  to  see  the  Christian  Church 
reflecting  the  civilisation  through  which  it  grew. 
Christianity  may  easily  be  reduced  to  the  fundamental 
Gospel  principles  taught  by  Jesus,  but  in  that  pure, 
simple  form  it  was  not  spread  over  the  world  and 
perpetuated.  Originating  on  Jewish  soil,  it  never 
outgrew  the  Jewish  tinge.  During  the  post-apostolic 
period  it  was  powerfully  modified  by  the  classical 
philosophy  of  Rome,  Greece,  and  Alexandria.  In 
post-Constantinian  times  the  multitudes  of  heathen 
converted  to  Christianity  introduced  heathen  modifica- 
tions and  compromises.  The  spread  of  the  Church  to 
Teutonic  soil,  there  to  encounter  a  sturdy  barbarism  in 
most  intimate  relations,  produced  modifying  influences 
which  can  easily  be  seen  in  the  history  of  the  Church. 
The  Germanic  contribution  was  to  prove  to  be  one 
of  the  most  important  and  influential  forces  in  the 
whole  history  of  the  Church,  because    it    created,   in 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe      261 


a  large  sense,    modern    civilisation  and    the   modern 
Church. 

This  period  of  zealous  missionary  endeavour  among 
the  Celtic  and  Teutonic  tribes  was  a  great  pioneer 
movement.  Far  too  little  attention  has  been  paid 
to  it  by  historians  and,  consequently,  comparatively 
small  credit  has  been  granted  to  it  as  a  force  in  the 
evolution  of  our  institutions  to-day.  It  is  impossible 
to  conceive  what  would  have  been  the  history  of  Europe 
and  the  civilisation  she  has  planted  around  the  earth 
had  not  Christianity  entered  at  this  epoch  to  lay  the 
foundations.  Every  institution  would  have  developed 
differently  and  the  world  would  certainly  not  be  what 
it  is  to-day. 

Sources 


A.— PRIMARY: 


-ENGLAND,    IRELAND,    AND     SCOTLAND.        See    GrOSS, 

Sources  and  Lit.  of  Eng.  Hist. 
1. — Gildas  (d.  570),     Works.     Transl.  by  J.  A. 

Giles.     Bohn  Lib. 
2. — Bede     (d.     735),    Ecclesiastical    History    of 

England.     Various  eds. 
3. — Neimius  (d.  9th  cent.).  History  of  the  Britons 

(to  642).     Bohn. 
. — Ethelwerd  (d.  988),  Chronicle  (to  959).     lb. 

-Asser  (d.  909),  Life  of  Alfred  (to  893).     lb. 
. — Geoffrey  (d.  11 54),  British  History  (to  688).  lb. 
. — Henry  of  Huntingdon  (d.  n 55),  History  of 

England.     lb. 
. — Florence  of  Worcester  (d.  11 18),  Chronicle. 

lb. 
. — Earle,    J.,    Two    of    the   Saxon    Chronicles. 

Lond.,  1865. 
. — Plummer,  C,  Two  of  the  Saxon  Chronicles. 

Lond.,  1889. 
. — Giles,     J.  A.,     Patres    Ecclesice    Anglicance. 

Lond.,  1843-8.     19  vols.     Works  of  thirteen 

Fathers.     Parts  in  Eng. 


10 


11 


262     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


12. — The  Pipe  Rolls.     Lond.,  1 884-1 900.     24  vols. 
13. — English     Historical     Society     Publications. 

Lond.,  1838-50.     27  vols. 
14. — Mason,  A.  J.,  The  Mission  of  St.  Augustine 

to  England  according  to  the  Original  Documents. 

Camb.,  1897. 
15. — Haddon,  A.  W.,  and  Stubbs,  W.,  Councils 

and  Ecclesiastical  Documents  relating  to  Great 

Britain  and  Ireland.    Lond.,  1869-71.    3  vols. 

Some  transl.  and  fine  Eng.  notes. 
16. — Johnson,  J.,   A   Collection  of  the  Laws  and 

Canons  of  the  Church  of  England  (to  15 19). 

Oxf.,  1850. 
17. — Foxe,  J.,  Acts  and  Monuments.     Lond.,  1563. 

Best  ed.   by  Pratt  and  Stoughton.     Lond., 

1877.     8  vols. 
18. — Gee,    H.,    and    Hardy,    W.    J.,    Documents 

Illustrative  of  English  Church  History.     Lond. , 

1896. 
19. — Colby,  C.  W.,  Selections  from  the  Sources  of 

English  History.     Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  1899. 
20. — Lee,   G.  C,  Leading  Documents  of  English 

History.     Lond.,  1900. 
21. — Stevens,  H.  M.,  and  Adams,  G.  B.      Select 

Documents  of  English  Constitutional  History, 

N.  Y.,  1901. 
22. — Univ.  of  Pa.,  Translations  and  Reprints,  ii., 

No.  7. 

11. — FRANCE! 

1. — Masson,  G.,  The  Early  Chroniclers  of  France. 

Lond.,  1879. 
2. — Gregory  of  Tours,  Ecclesiastical  of  the  Franks. 

Univ.  of  Pa.     Tr.  announced. 

III. — GERMANY: 

1. — Boniface,  Works.  A  few  letters  translated 
in  preface  of  Giles,  Patres  Ecclesice  Anglicance. 

Bibliographical  note: — Much  valuable  material 
for  England  has  not  yet  been  translated  into 
English.  For  France,  Spain,  Germany,  Scan- 
dinavia and  the  Slavic  lands  practically  all  the 
material  is  in  Latin.  Some  of  the  chief  sources 
are:    Pertz,    Monumenta;   Mansi,    Sacrorum; 


\ 


Spread  of  the  Church  over  Europe      263 

Migne,  Patrologiae;  Niebuhr,  Corpus  Byzan- 
tinae;  Jaffe,  Monumenta  and  Regesta;  Potthast 
Regesta;  Bolland,  Acta;  Pelzel  and  Dabrowsky, 
Rerun  Bohemis;  Hubner,  Inscriptiones  Brit- 
annia Christianas. 

B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Aikman,    J.    L.,     Cyclopaedia    of    Christian 

Missions.     Lond.,  1861. 
2. — Allen,    J.    R.,    Monumental   History   of   the 

Early  British  Church.     Lond.,  1889. 
3. — Bliss,    E.    M.,    Encyclopaedia    of    Missions. 

N.  Y.,  1 891.     2  vols. 
4. — Briggs,  F.  W.,  Missions:  Apostolic  and  Mod- 
ern.    Lond.,  1864. 
5. — Burkitt,  F.    C,    Early    Christianity   outside 

of  the  Roman  Empire.     Camb.,  1899. 
6. — Charles,  Mrs.  R.,  Early  Christian  Missions 

in  Ireland,  Scotland  and  England.  Lond.,  1893. 
7. — Choules,  J.  O.,   and  Smith,  T.,  Origin  and 

History  of  Missions.     Bost.,  1842.     2  vols. 
8. — Hole,  C,    Early  Missions  to  and  within  the 

British  Isles.     Lond.,  1888.     Home  Missions 

in  the  Early  Mediaeval  Period.     Lond.,  i88q. 
9. — Kingsmill,   J.,   Missions   and   Missionaries. 

Lond.,  1853. 
10. — Maclear,  G.  F.,  Apostles  of  Mediaeval  Europe. 

Lond.,  1869.     History  of  Christian  Missions 

during     the    Middle    Ages.     Camb.,      1863. 

Conversion  of  the  Celts.     Lond.,  1879. 

Conversion    of    the    Slavs.     Lond.,    1879. 

Conversion  of  the  English.     Lond.,   1879. 

Conversion  of  the  Northmen.     Lond.,  1879. 
11. — Merivale,  C,  Conversion  of  the  West.     N.  Y., 

1879.     5  vols.     The  Conversion  of  the  Roman 

Empire.     Boyle    Lect.     Lond.,     1864.     The 

Conversion  of  the  Northern  Nations.      Boyle 

Lect.     Lond.,  1865. 
12. — Newell,  E.  J.,  St.  Patrick.     Lond.,  1878. 
13. — Smith,     F.,     The    Origin    and    History    of 

Missions.     Bost.,  1842. 
14. — Smith,    G.,     Short    History     of     Christian 

Missions.    N.  Y.,  1884. 


264     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


15. — Smith,  R.  T.,  The  Church  in  Roman  Gaul. 
Lond.,  1878. 

16. — Smith,  T.,  Mediceval  Missions.  Edinb.,  1880. 

jy. — Snow,  T.  B.,  St.  Gregory  the  Great.  Lond., 
1892. 

18. — Summers,  W.  H.,  Rise  and  Spread  of  Chris- 
tianity in  Europe.     N.  Y.,  1894^ 

19. — Taylor,  A.  T.,  How  Christianity  Conquered 
the  Roman  Empire. 

20. — Walrond,  T.  F.,  Christian  Missions  before  the 
Reformation.     Lond.,  1873. 

21. — Wyse,  J.,  Missionary  Centres  of  the  Middle 
Ages.     Lond.,  1872. 

11. — general: 

Adeney,  ch.  8.  Alzog,  ii.,  ch.  1.  Anderson, 
J.,  Scot,  in  Early  Chr.  Times.  Butler,  ch.  46- 
49.  Cheetham,  ch.  14.  Coxe,  Lect.  2,  sec.  28- 
30;  Lect.  4,  sec.  1-3.  Crooks,  ch.  31. 
Darras,  i.,  54,  269,  329,  333-336,  399;  ii., 
254.  Dollinger,  ii.,  ch.  2 ;  iii.,  ch.  1.  Foulkes, 
ch.  5-10.  Fisher,  45/.,  145  f.,  163.  Gieseler, 
2d  pd.,  sec.  107,  108,  122-126,  134;  3d  pd., 
sec.  16,  37-40, 44.  Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  24-26. 
Godkin,  Hist,  of  Hung.  Godwin,  Hist,  of 
Fr.  Greene,  Hist,  of  M.  A.  Guericke,  sec. 
65-68.  Hardwick,  ch.  1,  5,  9,  13.  Hase, 
sec.  148-156.  Hore,  ch.  6,  8.  Hurst,  i., 
556-599,  619.  Kurtz,  i.,  397-401,  440-482; 
ii.,  1-13.  Mahan,  bk.  4,  ch.  12.  Masson, 
Early  Chroniclers  of  Fr.  Milman,  i.,  bk.  3, 
ch.  2;  ii.,  bk.  4,  ch.  3-5.  Moeller,  L,  535- 
541.  Neander,  iii.,  1-84,  271-346.  Pres- 
sense,  bk.  i.,  ch.  1.  Robertson,  bk.  2,  ch.  13. 
SchafT,  pd.  3,  ch.  1,  pd.  4,  ch.  3. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

SEPARATION     OF    THE    ROMAN    AND    GREEK    CHURCHES 

Outline  :  I. — Relation  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  Churches  before 
325.  II. — Effect  of  the  Arian  Controversy  on  the  situation.  III. — 
The  history  of  image  worship.  IV. — Character  and  results  of 
the  Iconoclastic  Controversy.  V. — Final  separation.  VI. — Re- 
semblances and  differences  between  the  two  churches.  VII. — 
Sources. 

ROME  conquered  Greece  by  military  force  (146 
B.C.)  ;  meanwhile  Greece  made  a  more  thorough 
conquest  of  Rome  by  ideas.  While  there  were 
many  significant  differences  in  language,  customs,  edu- 
cation, and  institutions,  yet  religiously  they  were 
united  in  a  twofold  way:  (1)  by  a  common  paganism, 
and  (2)  by  Christianity.  The  East  was  philosophical, 
contemplating,  metaphysical,  and  keen  in  discrimina- 
tion; the  West  was  practical,  legal,  and  aggressively 
conservative.  This  difference  in  temperament  was  des- 
tined to  have  marked  historical  results.1  While  the 
West  produced  the  mediaeval  Church,  the  East  re- 
mained comparatively  stationary.  When  the  seat 
of  Roman  empire  was  removed  from  the  Eternal 
City  to  Constantinople  in  330,  it  appeared  as  if  the 
eastern  world  had  again  become  triumphant. 

A  divergence  between  the  churches  of  the  East  and 
Ihe  churches  of  the  West,  can  be  detected  in  the  Chris- 
tian philosophy  and  Christian  theology  from  the  begin- 
ning.    The  differences  became  more  pronounced  as  the 

1  Tozer,  The  Ch.  and  the  East.  Em  p.,  172. 

265 


266     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


years  passed  by.  The  Arian  Controversy  (see  Ch.  IX.) 
produced  the  first  crisis  in  the  breach  between 
Roman  and  Greek  Christianity.  The  victory  won  by 
the  West  over  the  East  was  only  temporary,  however, 
because  in  the  end  the  powerful  state  was  arrayed  on 
the  side  of  the  Eastern  Church.  The  adoption  of  the 
"filioque"  clause  to  the  Nicene  Creed  by  the  Western 
Church,  gave  mortal  offence  to  the  Greeks.  The 
doctrine  of  purgatory  was  another  irreconcilable 
di ff erence .  Theoretically  the  Church  was  still  united : 
£i)  in  the  Emperor  who  ruled_both  wings  of  the  old 
Empire;  (2)  in  the  Pope  who  pretended  to  rule  over  the< 
East  and  the  West ;  and  jjjjn  the  fundamental  Chris-  f 
tian  principles.  While  there  were  still  many  resem- 
blances, the  differences  were  also  becoming  well 
marked  in  Church  polity  and  organisation,  in  dogma, 
in  rites  and,  ceremonies,  in  monasticism,  and  in  mission- 
ary activity. 

Among  the  matters  in  dispute  was  the  growing 
differentiation  of  opinion  on  the  question  of  the 
marriage  of  the  clergy.  The  Roman  Church  was  much 
more  strict  in  the  enforcement  of  celibacy.  The  two 
churches  refused  to  agree  on  the  same  universal  coun- 
cils, and,  of  course,  as  a  result,  accepted  an  unequal 
number  of  canons  as  valid.  Neither  mnlH  thp.v  ag^gg 
on  the_proper  day  for  celebrating  Easter*.  There  were 
also  many  minor  differences  in  reference  to  such  trivial 
things  as  the  tonsure,  the  beard,  priestly  garments, 
and  Lent.  Another  stumbling-block  was  set  up  when 
tjie  dispute  arose  over,  the  sacramental  brpad  .in  ]he>_ 
eucharist.  In  the  ninth  century  the  Western  Church 
departed  from  the  earlier  practice  of  using  fermented 
p'read  and  insisted  on  the  unleavened  bread  as  in  the 
"Jewish  passover. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated    267 

The  second  crisis  in  the  separation  arose  in  connection 
with  the  Iconoclastic  dispute]  In  the  ancient  religions; 
image  worship  appeared,  but  usually  in  the  second  stage 
of  development.  Max  Miiller  contends  that  in  India 
"the  worship  of  idols  is  a  secondary  formation,  a  later 
degradation  of  the  more  primitive  worship."  The 
ancient  Persians  had  no  images. 1  The  same  was  true 
of  the  ancient  Greeks. 2  The  earliest  statue  in  Rome, 
that  of  Diana,  was  between  57 7  and  ^4  b.c.s  The 
old  Germans  had  neither  temples  nor  images  of  their 
invisible  gods.  4  Among  the  Jews,  too,  reference  to  im- 
ages seemed  to  point  to  a  later  period  of  their  history,  s 
From  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  however,  a  strong 
antipathy  to  images  of  all  kinds  developed.6  Hence 
Origen  asserted  of  the  Jews  that  "there  was  no  maker 
of  images  among  their  citizens;  neither  painter,  nor 
sculptor  was  in  their  state."7  The  Jewish  Christians, 
therefore,  were  imbued  with  a  strong  dislike  to  all 
tf\^  images.  Many  heathen  converts,  likewise,  fully  appre- 
ciating the  great  difference  between  the  Gospel  and 
the  idolatrous  religion  which  they  had  forsaken,  had  the 
wj  same  feeling.  Consequently,  it  may  be  said  that  the 
early  Christians  universally  condemned  all  heathen 
image   worship   and   all   customs   connected   with  it. 

1  Herodotus,  bk.  i,  132;  Strabo,  732. 
*  2  Schoemann,  Griech.  Alterthumer,  ii.,  197 ;  see  Alex.,  Strom.,  i.,  ch. 
5,  §28;  ch.  ii.,  §77. 

3  Preller,  Roman  Mythology,  i.;  Plutarch,  Numa,  c.  8;  Aug., 
City  of  God.  iv.,  ch.  31. 

4  Grimm,  Teutonic  Myth.,  i.,  104. 

s  Ex.  20:4,  5;  25:18-20,  26:1;  32:4;  36:35;  Deut.  '4:15-18; 
5:8,  9;  32:17;  Gen.  31:19;  Judg.,  17:5;  18:30;  Hos.  3:4;  Zach.  10:2; 
2  Kings  13:24;  1  Sam.  19:13,  16;  Lev.  17:7;  Ps.  106:37;  1  Kings 
6:23»  32>  35;  Isa-  40:44;  3o:22;  Joseph,  Antiq.  xv.,  8,  12;  xviii.,  3,  1. 

6  Joseph.,  Antiq.,  xv.,ch.  8,  §1-2 ;  Jewish  Wars,  i.,  ch.  ^^,  §2-3. 

1  Against  Celsus,  iv.,  31. 


268      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  adoration  of  the  reigning  Emperors  was  especially 

^  denounced.1     Christians  were  at  first  too  poor  and 

obscure  to  adorn  their  meeting  places  with  art.     In 

fact,  the  pagans  accused  them  of  having  "no  altars, 

^*  no  temples,  no  known  images." 

There  is  evidence,  however,  that  the  use  of  images 
by  the  Christians  began  comparatively  early  and  that 
it  was  more  marked  in  the  art-loving  East  than  in  the 
West.  Irenasus  (2d  cent.)  says  that  a  secret  sect,  the 
Gnostics,  "possess  images,  some  of  them  painted,  and 
others  formed  of  different  kinds  of  material.  .  .  .  They 
crown  their  images  and  set  them  up  along  with  the 
images  of  the  philosophers."  2  But  these  Gnostics  were 
heretics.  Emperor  Alexander  Severus  (222-235)  nad. 
images  of  several  characters  of  Scripture  including  Jesus, 
in  his  Lararium.  But  he  was  a  pagan.  The  cata- 
combs of  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  centuries  are 
covered  with  paintings  of  sacred  emblems,  such  as  the 
lamb,  olive  branch,  Christ  carrying  the  cross,  anchor, 
ship,  fish,  sower,  cross,  Christ  with  the  lost  sheep 
on  his  shoulder,  bottle  of  wine,  and  other  representa- 
tions.3 These  emblems  were  used  in  the  first  instance 
in  private  houses.  The  first  undisputed  proof  of  the  use 
of  art  in  public  worship  among  the  orthodox  is  found  in 
a  decree  of  the  Synod  of  Elvira,  Spain,  in  306,  that 
"pictures  ought  not  to  be  placed  on  a  church  lest 
that  which  is  worshipped  and  adored  be  painted  on 
walls."4  Tertullian  (b.  150)  says  that  the  communion 
cup  usually  bore  a   representation  of  the  Good  Shep- 

1  Rev.  15:2. 

2  Her.  i.,  ch.  25,  6;  Aug.,  Her.  ch.  7. 

3  Northcote  and  Brownlow,  Roma  Sotterance;  Northcote,  Epitaphs 
of  the  Catacombs. 

4  Hefele,  i.,  151. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated    269 


herd.1  He  likewise  says  that  the  formation  of  the 
cross  with  the  hand  was  very  common.  "At  every 
journey  and  movement,  at  every  coming  in  and  going 
out,  at  the  putting  on  of  our  clothes  and  our  shoes, 
at  baths,  at  meals,  at  lighting  of  candles,  at  going  to 
bed,  at  sitting  down,  whatever  occupation  employs 
us,  we  mark  our  forehead  with  the  sign."2  Clement 
of  Alexandria  early  in  the  third  century  mentions  the 
dove,  fish,  ship,  lyre  and  anchor  as  suitable  emblems  for 
Christian  signet  rings.  3  Constantine  had  the  cross  set 
up  beside  his  own  statue,  in  312,  after  the  defeat  of 
Maxentius.4  He  also  had  a  costly  cross  in  his  palaces 
and  had  the  emblem  engraved  on  the  arms  of  his  sol- 
diers. 6  Before  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  Bible 
manuscripts  were  beautifully  illuminated  and  illustra- 
ted. This  evidence  shows  that  the  use  of  images  in 
worship  began  in  the  second  century  and  increased  with 
the  growth  of  the  Church  until  by  the  fourth  century 
it  was  a  marked  institution  in  Christendom.  There, 
were  three_distinct  phases  of  its  development:  (1)  the 
use  of  the  cross ;  (2)  the  employment  of_  emblems 
and  symbols^  (3)  jhe_appearance  of  portraiture  and 

The  growth  of  image  worship  from  the  fourth  to  the 
eighth  centuries  was  due  to  certain  explainable  causes. 
The  victory  of  Christianity  under  Constantine  brought 
a  wholesale  conversion  of  pagans  to  the  new  faith,  V^-^c: 
wealth,  power,  and  extraordinary  activity  in  building 
churches.     What   was    more   natural   than   that   the 

1  De  Pud.,  7,  10. 

2  DeCor.  Mil,  c.  iii.,;  Ad.  Uxor.,  ii.,  5. 

3  Paed.,  iii.,  11.,  §59. 

4  Euseb.,  Keel.  Hist.,  ix.,  9. 
s  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  49. 
6  Sozomen,  Eccl.  Hist.,  i.,  8. 


270      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


/> 


^ 


architectural  and  artistic  ideas  of   the  day  should  be 
employed  in  beautifying  them?     The  Christian  Em- 
peror himself  set  the  example  of  using  sacred  pictures 
by  embellishing  his  new  capital  with  religious  represen- 
tations, such  as  Daniel  in  the  Lion's  Den  and  Christ 
as   the   Good   Shepherd.     Constan tine's   successors   in 
showering  their  favours  upon  the  Christians,  cultivated 
this    practice.     It    must    be    remembered,    too,    that 
Christianity  had  become  more  material  and  worldly 
1  than  it  was  in  the  Apostolic  Age.     The  conversion 
K  of  the  masses  to  Christianity  was  merely  nominal  and 
*  external.     What  was   more  natural  than  that  they 
[  should  bring  with  them  their  pagan  ideas  and  love 
for  show  and  ostentation,  and  that  they  should  clamour 
for  a  material  representation  of  their  new  faith? 
^     Following  popular  opinion  and  obeying  private  de- 
->  mands,  the  clergy  themselves  became  champions  of  the 
i  use  of  images.     In  the  West,  Pope  Gregory  the  Great 
(  gave  his  official  sanction  to  the  institution.     Along  with 
f    the  use  of  images  grew  up,  out  of  the  spiritual  worship  of 
>  saints  and  martyrs,  the  worship  of  their  relics  and  their 
l  images,  and  pilgrimages  to  the  scenes  of  their  labours. 
The  ignorance  and  superstition  of  the  period  supplied 
an  excellent  atmosphere  for  this  marvellous  evolution. 
It  appears,  then,  that  the  Christian  Church,  planted 
in  the  home  of  paganism,  supported  largely  by  converts 
from  paganism,  in  a  barbarous,  credulous  age  such 
as  that,  naturally  developed  and  abused  the  use  of 
art  in  worship. 

Poetry,  music,  painting,  sculpture,  and  architecture 
all  are  unquestionably  legitimate  handmaids  of  religion 
and  may  be  made  most  serviceable.  But  the  use  of 
images  for  ornament,  instruction,  and  enjoyment  is  one 
thing;  the  worship  of  images  is  quite  another  thing. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated    271 


In  the  Middle  Ages  only  a  few  lofty  souls  here  and  there 
took  the  true  view.  Pictures  were  put  into  churches 
not  as  objects  of  art,  but  as  aids  and  objects  of  worship. 
The  pictures  were  reverently  kissed  T  bows  and  pros- 
trations were  made  before  them,  candles  and  lamps 
were  used  to  illuminate  them,  and  incense  was  burned 
to  honour  them._ 

During^this  period,  we  have  a  number  of  excellent 
illustrations  of  hTiage_.worshipI  Constantine  used 
art  to  beautify  his  new  capital  in  the  East,  and  particu- 
larly to  adorn  his  palace.  Constantia,  his  sister,  asked 
Eusebius  for  an  image  of  Jesus. 1  The  veneration  of 
the  cross  became  especially  pronounced  after  its  adop- 
tion by  Constantine,  and  it  was  used  in  all  religious 
ceremonies  as  an  emblem  of  the  victory  of  Jesus  over 
sin  and  the  devil.  According  to  Jerome  the  sign  of  the 
cross  was  made,  as  it  is  to-day,  in  witness  to  written 
documents. 2  Emperor  Julian  (361)  taunted  the  Chris- 
tians thus:  "Ye  worship  the  wood  of  the  cross,  making 
shadowy  figures  of  it  on  the  forehead,  and  painting 
it  at  the  entrance  to  your  houses."  St.  Chrysostom 
(b.  347)  wrote: 

The  sign  of  universal  execration,  the  sign  of  extremest 
punishment,  has  now  become  the  object  of  universal 
longing  and  love.  We  see  it  everywhere  triumphant. 
We  find  it  in  the  houses,  on  the  roofs  and  the  walls;  in 
cities  and  villages;  on  the  markets,  the  great  roads  and  in 
the  deserts;  on  mountains  and  in  valleys;  on  the  sea,  on 
ships;  on  books  and  on  weapons;  on  wearing  apparel;  in 
the  marriage  chamber;  at  banquets;  on  vessels  of  gold 
and  silver ;  in  pearls ;  in  pictures  on  the  walls  and  on  beds ; 
on  the  bodies  of  brute  animals  that  are  diseased;  on  the 
bodies  of  those  pestered  by  evil  spirits;  in  the  dances  of 

1  See  Book  iv.,  Letter  30.  2  Comm.  on  Ezek.,  ix.,  4. 


272     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


those  going  to  pleasure ;  in  the  associations  of  those  that 
mortify  their  bodies. * 

Nilus,  a  disciple  of  Chrysostom,  permitted  the  use  of 
the  cross  and  pictoral  Bible  stories  in  the  churches, 
but  opposed  images  of  Jesus  and  the  martyrs. 

QmjEQh^s  began  to  be  decorated  in  the  fourth  century, 
and  in  the  fifth  paintings  and  mosaics  were  introduced/ 
Constantine  had  "symbols  of  the  Good  Shepherd" 
placed  in  the  forums  of  Constantinople.2  The  Holy 
Ghost  was  commonly  represented  as  a  dove  over  the 
altar  or  the  font.  3  The  Nestorian  Controversy  and  the 
Eutychian  discussion  helped  to  introduce  pictures  of 
the  blessed  Virgin  and  the  Holy  Child,  Jesus.  St. 
Cyril  advocated  the  use  of  images  in  the  fifth  century 
so  clearly  that  he  has  been  called  the  "Father  of 
image  worship."  By  the  fifth  century,  churches4 
and  Church  books,  palaces  and  huts,  and  cemeteries 
were  covered  with  images  of  Christ  and  the  saints 
painted  by  the  monks,  while  representations  of  the 
martyrs,  monks,  and  bishops  were  found  everywhere. 
Even  pictures  of  the  Trinity  were  in  common  use.  In 
the  East,  women  decorated  their  dresses  with  personal 
images  and  pictures,  such  as  the  marriage  feast  of  Cana, 
the  sick  man  who  walked,  the  blind  man  who  saw, 
Magdalene  at  the  feet  of  Jesus,  and  the  resurrection 
of  Lazarus.  Portraits  of  Peter  and  Paul  covered  the 
walls  at  Rome.  Ambrose,  Jerome,  Augustine,  Epi- 
phanius,  Gregory  the  Great,  and  many  others  of  the 
Fathers,  testified  to  the  widespread  employment  of 

1  Contra  Judae.  et  Gentil,  §9;  see  Neander  ii.,  286. 

2  Euseb.,  Life  of  Const.,  iii.,  49- 

3  Kugler,  Handbook  of  Painting. 

4  Smith  and  Cheetham,  art.  on  "Images,"  p.  816  ff. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated    273 


images  both  for  public  and  for  private  worship.     The, 
ceremony  of  kissing  the  ima^e,  of  burning  incense  to 
rit,  of  bowing  before  it.  and  ot  praying  to  it,  was  gradu- 
ally developed  and  became  very  marked  m  the  sixtn" 
century.     The  climax,  however,  was  reached  in  the 
_eighth  century  when  the  paint  was  literally  scrape?; 
off  the  images  and  put  into  wine  to  make  it  holiei ,  and    ■  > 
'when  the  consecrated  bread  was  laid  upon  the  image    ^* 
^for  a  special  blessing.1 

When  the  portrait  phase  of  image  worship  developed, 
pictures  of  miraculous  origin  were  produced  and 
superstitious  practices  began  to  abound.  Not  a  few 
pictures  of  sacred  characters  were  attributed  to  Luke. 
Others    were    described    as    "the    God-made   images, 

which  the  hand  of  man  wrought  not."     It  was  but  an  . t  ^ 

short  step  to  attribute  miracles  and  cures  to  these 
images  of  divine  origin. 2  To  the  wonder-working  pic- 
tures  was  ascribed  motion,  speech,  and  action.  Out  of 
such  conditions  direct  idolatry  could  easily  develop. 

The  theory  of  the  educated  concerning  images  dif- 
fered very  much  from  that  of  the  ignorant.  The  images 
were  worshipped  by  the  masses  because  it  was  believed 
that  such  worship  drew  down  the  saint  into  the  image,  y-*. 
an  idea  which  came  from  the  pagan  belief  concerning 
the  statues  of  Jupiter  and  Mercury.  Leontius,  Bishop 
of  Neapolis,  near  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  said: 
"The  images  are  not  our  gods;  but  they  are  the  repre- 
sentations of  Christ  and  his  saints,  which  exist  and 
are  venerated  in  remembrance  and  in  honour  of  these, 


and  not  as  ornaments  of  the  church."3     To  a  hermit 

1  Imper.  Deer,  de  Cultulmag.,  618,  ed.,  Goldast,  Frankf.,  1608. 

2  Greg,  of  Tours,  Mirac,  i.,  22,  23;  Apol.  in  Act  4,    Cone.  Nic., 
ii.;  Labb.  vii.,  240. 

*Apol.  in  Act  4,  Cone.  Nic.,  ii.;  Labb.,  vii.,  237. 


274     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


who  asked  for  some  pious  symbols,  Pope  Gregory 
the  Great  sent  a  picture  of  Jesus  and  images  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  St.  Peter,  and  St.  Paul,  with  this 
'admonition: 

I  am  well  aware  that  thou  desirest  not  the  image  of  our 
Saviour  that  thou  mayest  worship  it  as  God,  but  to  enkindle, 
in  thee  the  love  of  Him  whose  image  thou  wouldst  see. 
Neither  do  we  prostrate  ourselves  before  an  image  as  before 
a  deity,  but  we  adore  Him  whom  the  image  represents  to  our •  jt 
memory  as  born  or  seated  on  the  throne;  and  according 
to  the  representation,  the  correspondent  feelings  of  joyful 
elevation,  or  of  painful  sympathy,  are  excited  in  our  breasts. i 

\**t  Images  were  put,  into  ormrrrips  "only  to  instruct  the_ 
minds  of  the  ignorant."  Again,  he  explained  the  use 
of  images  thus:  "It  is  one  thing  to  worship  a  picture 
and  another  to  learn  from  the  language  of  a  picture 
what  that  is  which  ought  to  be  worshipped.  What 
those  who  read  learn  by  means  of  writing,  that  do  the 
uneducated  learn  by  looking  at  a  picture."2 

The  most  eloquent  of  all  the  apologists  of  images, 
John  of  Damascus,  gave  this  explanation: 

1  am  too  poor  to  buy  books  and  I  have  no  leisure  for 
reading.  I  enter  the  church  choked  with  the  cares  of 
the  world.  The  glowing  colours  attract  my  attention  and 
delight  my  eyes  like  a  flowering  meadow;  and  the  glory  of 
God  steals  imperceptibly  into  my  soul.  I  gaze  on  the  forti- 
tude of  the  martyr  and  the  crown  with  which  he  is  rewarded, 
and  the  holy  fire  of  emulation  kindles  within  me  and  I 
receive  salvation.3 

It  must   be   remembered   that,    however  clearly  the 

i  Book  ix.,   Letter  52. 

2  Epist.  ad  eund.,  ix.,  9.     See  Ep.,  vii.,  in. 

3  On  Holy  Images,  ii.,  747. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated     275 


teachers  of  the  Church  might  see  the  difference  between 
.    the  right  use  of  images  to  instruct  the  unlettered  and 
1    to  excite  a  spiritual  feeling,  on  the  one  hand,  and  a 
J    superstitious   worship   of  images,   on   the   other,   the 
l^L  ignorant  masses  did  not  make  the  distinction  in  either 
1  thought  or  practice,  and  therein  lay  the  great  abuse. 
From  the  death  of  Gregory  the  Great  in  604  until 
the  outbreak  of  the  Iconoclastic  Controversy  in   7T6., 
twenty-five  Popes  ruled  in  Rome.     With  several  ex- 
ceptions they  were  ecclesiastics  of  no  historical  im- 
portance.    To  say  that  they  lost  nothing  of  the  ground 
gained  by  Gregory  the  Great  is  to  say  much  for  them. 
-    But    in  addition    they  made    some    progress    in   the 
evolution  of  the  mediaeval  Church.     On  this  question 
of  the  use  of  images  in  worship  they  uniformly  con- 
tinued the  policy  of  Gregory  the  Great. 

Opposition  began  as  early  as  the  use  of  images. 
Irenseus  in  the  second  century  (167)  denounced  the 
practice.1  Turtullian  (102),  quoting  the  second  of  the 
_Ten  Commandments,  severely  denounced  all  use  of  im- 
ages as  sinful. 2  Clement  of  Alexandria  (102)  took  the 
same  view.  3  Origen  also  based  his  opposition  to  the 
practice  upon  £he  Jewish  interpretation.  ■*  Minutius 
Feli  x  (2  20)  argued  that  man  was  the  image  of  God,  hence 
there  was  no  need  of  an v  artificial  representations.5 
Lactantius  (303)  held  that  since  the  spirit  of  Qad  coning 
h*  fiperi  A^PrywVmrA,  TTis  im^e  "must  always  be 
superfluous."^    Arnobius  (303)  took  the  same  view.7 

1  Adv.  Her.,  i.,  c.  25,  §6. 

2  De  Sped.,  c.  23 ;  Adv.  Herm.,  c.  1 ;  De  Idolatr.,  c.  4. 

3  Pratrept.,  c.  4,  §62;  Strom.,  vii.,  c.  5,  §28. 

*  Adv.  Celsus,  iv.,  §31;  viii.,  §17. 
s  Octav.,  c.  9. 

*  Instit.,  ii.,  c.  2;  Epit.,  c.  25. 
7  Adv.  Gent.,  iii. 


276     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Christians  were  told  to  carry  God  and  His  Son  in  their 
hearts  and  not  to  attempt  to  procure  their  images. 
The  Spanish  Synod  of  Elvira  (306)  excluded  images  from 
the  churches.1  The  early  Fathers,  taken  altogether, 
looked  with  but  little  favour  upon  the  misuse  of  images 
in  worship.  Eusebius,  in  replying  to  the  request  from 
Constantia  for  an  image  of  Christ,  wrote  a  famous 

Jetter  in  opposition  to  the  practice  which  virtually 
became  the  platform  of  the  Iconoclastic  party.2 
St.  Augustine  (3Q3)  declared  that  "  It  is  unlawful  to  set 
up  such  an  image  to  God  in  a  Christian  temple. "3_ 
Epiphanius  (d.  402)  with  his  own  hands  tore  down 
a  curtain  which  had  an  image  on  it  in  a  little  village 

^church  in  Palestine.  This  seems  to  be  the  first  act  of 
^conoclasm.4  7\.sterius  (d.  410),  Bishop  in  Pontus, 
opposed  wearing  Bible  pictures  on  clothing  and  told 
his  people  to  wear  the  image  of  Christ  in  their  hearts.5 

^Xenius  (end  of  sixth  century),  the  Monophistic  Bishop 
of  Hierapolis,  destroyed  the  images  of  the  angels  in  his 
church  and  hid  those  of  Jesus.6  In  518,  the  clergy 
of  Antioch  complained  to  the  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople that  their  Patriarch  had  melted  down  the  images 
of  gold  and  silver  hung  over  the  font  and  the  altar.7 
Serenus,  Bishop  of  Marseilles,  early  in  the  seventh 
century,  threw  the  images  out  of  his  churches.  Porje 
Gregory  the  Great  praised  him  for  his  zeal,  but  still 
justified  the  use  of  images. 7     The  Jews  and  the  Moham- 

1  Can.  36;  Mansi,  ii.,  264.     See^Hefele,  i.,  151. 

2  Diet,  of  Christian  Biog.,  198;  Mansi,  xiii.,  313. 

3  De  Fide  et  Symbolo,  c.  7. 

4  Migne,  ii.,  517-527. 
s  Kurtz,  i.,  364. 

6  Fleury,  1.,  xxx.,  18. 

7  lb.,  xxxl.,  39.     See  Smith  and  Cheetham,  art  "  Images." 

8  Bk.  xi.,  Ep.  13.     Read  Neander,  iii.,  199  fL 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated  277 


medans  in  the  seventh  century  fiercely  assailed  the 
Christian  veneration  of  imaffps  as  irinlgtry^Thia  ^ 
crystallised  the  Iconoclastic  elements  of  opposition 
into  a  party.  Finally,  in  the  eighth  century,  the" 
'secular  head,  Leo  III.,  the  Isaurian  (716-741),  cham- 
pioned the  Iconoclastic  cause.  .His  son,  Con  st.a.-n  ting, 
~V.  (741-77.O  >  carried  it  forward.  The  Synod  of  Con- 
stantinople in  ika  officially  condemned  the  use  of 
images,1  and  this  marks  the  climax  of  ..the  movement. 

It  was  not  long  now  before  there  appeared  in  Christen- 
dom two  distinct  parties:  (1)  The  Iconolatrae,  or  image 
worshippers,  who  were  composed  of  the  leading  church- 
men like  Germanus,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  ancL 
John  of  Damascus  in  the  East ;  the  monks,  the  common" 
^Iergy,  and  the  masses  of  the  common  people  in  the 
East,  and  Pope  Gregory  II.  and  the  powerful  Church  of 
the  West.    (2)  The  Iconoclasti,  or  image  breakers,  who 
included  the  Emperor  and  his  civil  officers ;  his  army, 
made  up  mostly  of  barbarians  and  Asiatic  heretics2: 
afew  churrhmen  like  Anastasius,  who  succeeded  the 
(deposed  Germanus,  actuated  by  political  motives :  and"1 
the  Carolingian  rulers  in  the  West._ 

The  conflict  was  begun  by  Leo  III.,  the  Isaurian, 
a  soldier  of  fortune,  who  through  ability  as  a  warrior 
had  won  the  imperial  crown, — a  powerful  ruler 
in  falling  Greece, — active,  sincere,  illiterate,  honest, 
despotic,  and  unwise.  Ambition  to  convert  the  Jews, 
Mohammedans,  and  Montanists  made  him  feel  keenly 
the  sting  of  their  sarcastic  attacks  on  images.  3     One 

1  These  images  were  mosaics,  frescoes,  and  movable  fiat  icons 
like  those  found  in  the  East  to-day.  It  is  very  unlikely  that  statues 
were  used  in  this  early  period. 

2  Finlay,  i.,  387;  ii.,  27-29. 

3  In  722  he  ordered  the  Jews  and  Montanists  to  be  baptised  by 
force. 


278     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


of  his  advisers,  Beser,  was  a  converted  Mohammedan, 
who  had  held  numerous  interviews  with  Islam  leaders. 
As  a  zealous  supporter  of  the  Catholic  Church,  Leo 
no  doubt  sincerely  desired  to  restore  the  primitive 
simplicity  of  Christian  worship.  As  monarch  and 
priest,  he  believed  himself  called  upon  by  God  to  root 
out  idolatry.  He  was  undoubtedly  a  noble  puritan 
'in  his  purposes  and  motives  and  called  himself  a 
second  Tosiah.^^ 

Tn  726,  he  issued  the  first  edict  against  images, 
authorising  their  destruction1  an^l  t.Vip  -next,  year  the 
exarch  promulgated  it  in  Ravenna  and  the  West.  This 
was  opposed  by  the  patriarch,  Germanus,  and  most  of 
the  clergy ;  hence,  it  was  enforced  only  in  a  few  places 
where  the  bishops  supported  the  Emperor.  The  fol- 
lowing incident  will  illustrate  the  popular  indignation. 
Imperial  officers  were  sent  to  destroy  a  fine  image  of 
Jesus  above  the  bronze  gate  of  Constantinople,  which 
the  people  regarded  with  unusual  reverence.  A  ladder 
was  put  up  and  a  soldier  mounted  it  to  take  the  figure 
"down.  A  crowd  of  women  watching  the  act  begged 
that  the  image  might  be  given  to  them.  Instead, 
the  soldier  struck  the  figure  in  the  face  with  a  hatchet. 
The  women  were  enraged,  pulled  down  the  ladder,  and 
killed  the  soldier.  The  Emperor  sent  troops  to  quell 
the  tumult  and  to  carry  off  the  image,  and  in  its  place 
he  had  a  cross  set  up  with  these  words  on  it:  "The 
Emperor  could  not  suffer  a  dumb  and  lifeless  figure 
of  earthly  materials,  smeared  over  with  paint,  to  stand 
as  a  representative  of  Christ.  He  has,  therefore, 
erected  here  the  sign  of  the  cross."2 

Pope  Gregory  II.,  upon  receipt  of  the  edict,  called 

1  Hefele,  iii.,  376. 

2  Neander,  iii,  213. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated  279 


a  synod  at  Rome  to  consider  it  (726).  _  The  synod 
condemned  the  Jfn^nrlastiV  h^r^y  and  ronfirmed  the 
-use  of  images. 1  In  727,  the  Pope  wrote  his  first  letter 
to  the  Emperor.2  It  was  arrogant  and  dogmatic.^ 
without  tact  or  persuasiveness.  It  was  full  of  the 
most  ludricrous  historical  blunders^  and  gave  some 
fantastic  interpretations  of  the  "Bible.  In  it,  the  Pope 
justified  the  use  of  images,  threatened  the  Emperor 
with  the  power  of  the  West,  and  told  him  that  his 
portrait,  once  honoured  throughout  Italy,  had  been 
destroyed  everywhere.  In  the  second  letter,  the 
Pope  plainly  told  the  Emperor:  "Doctrines  are  not 
the  business  of  the  Emperor,  but  of  the  bishops."  He 
declared  furthermore  that  the  whole  world  was  cursing 
the  Emperor.  ' '  The  very  children  mock  thee !  Go  into 
a.  school  and  say  '  I  am  an  enemy  of  images' ;  the 
scholars  will  hurl  their  tablets  at  your  head." 3  lohn 
pf  Damascus,  aimed  twc^ brilliant  and  powerful  orations 
at  the  Emperor  in  which  is  found  perhaps  the  best" 
defence  of  image  worship.  He  declared  that  the  pic- 
tures were  the  "  books  of  the  unlearned."4  The  pro- 
fessors of  the  University  at  Constantinople  declared 
their  opposition  to  the  edict.5  The  inhabitants  of 
Greece  used  the  edict  as  an  occasion  for  rebellion  to 
secure  fiscal  and  administrative  reforms,  and  even 
went  so  far  as  to  proclaim  a  rival  Emperor. 

^Leo  met  all  this  opposition  firmly.     The  Patriarch 
Germanus  was  deposed  (730)  while  Anastasius  was  put  . 

1  Mansi,  xii.,  267. 

2  Thatcher  and  McNeal,    A  Source  Book  for  Mediaeval  History, 
No.  41 ;  Diet,  of  Christ.  Biog.,  art.  on  Leo  III. ;  Mansi,  xii.,  960. 

5  Mansi,  xii.,  959;  Hefele,  iii.,  389-404.      Milman  quotes  this  let- 
ter as  the  first   ii.,  bk.  4,  ch.  7. 
*  Orat.,  ii.,  §10. 
s  Finlay,  ii.,  36. 


280     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


in  his  place,  and  the  various  outbreaks  were  at  once_ 
subdued  with  a  strong  hand.     An  effort  was  made  to 
either  capture  or  kill  the  Pope.     The  University  of 
Constantinople  was  closed  and  the  professors  arrested ; 
'the   Greek   rebels   were    defeated   and   their    leaders 
beheaded ;  and  an  effort  was  made  to  stop  the  pop- 
ular John   of  Damascus.     Leo  then  promulgated  his^ 
second  edict  in  730  for  the  complete  abolition  of  image 
worship.     Anastasius,  the  puppet  patriarch,  at  once 
countersigned  the  edict,  and  thus  gave  it  ecclesiastical 
sanction.     In    the  East    it    was   generally    enforced. 
All   images    were    removed    from    the    churches    and 
burned;  the   painted   walls   were  whitewashed   over; 
only  the  cross  and  the  crucifix  were  left;  but  still  the 
Iconolatrse  were  far  from  being  subdued.     Meanwhile 
opposition  in  the  West  grew  stronger.     Gregory^IIL^ 
thejast  Pontiff  t.n  be  confirmed  in  his  election  by  the 
Eastern  Emperor,  called  a  council  and  excommunicate^ 
all  Iconoclasts. 1    In  revenge,  Leo  sent  a  fleet  against  the 
Pope,  which  was"  wrecked,  and  also  extended  the  rule 
of  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  over  papal  territory 
in  Greece  and  southern  Italy.     This  action  led  the 
Pnpp    to    begin    negotiations    with    Charles    Marteh2 
and  that  opened  a  new  chapter  in   the  rise  of  the 
rn^T^.val  Church  and  in  the  world's  history.. 

.In  741,  Leo  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  Constantine^ 
V.,  only  twenty-two  years  of  age,  a  ruler  and  general 
'ot  ability,  but~oTlow  tastes  and  vile  habits.  He 
became  a  zealous  persecutor  of  image  worship,  an 
idol  of  the  Iconoclasts,  and  won  the  victory  for  their 
party.  His  policy  was  to  continue  his  father's  work. 
Consequently  in  754,  he  called  a  universal  council  in 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  42. 

2  Ibid.,  No.  43. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated  281 


Constantinople.  Although  it  was  the  largest  assembly 
ever  held  up  to  that  time,  338  bishops  being  present, 
yet  neither  the  Pope,  nor  the  patriarchs  of  Antioch,  Al- 
exandria, and  Jerusalem  sent  representatives.  Hence, 
it  was  not  recognised  as  oecumenical.  The  use  of 
images  and  pictures  was  condemned  as  idolatry, 
and  even  the  crucifix  was  put  under  the  ban.  "The 
godless  art  of  painting"  was  proscribed,  and  the 
leaders  of  the  image  worshippers,  Germanus,  John  of 
Damascus,  and  George  of  Cyprus,  were  anathematised. l 
Backed  up  by  these  measures,  the  Emperor  resolved 
to  root  out  the  evil  for  ever.  All  images  were  ordered 
destroyed ;  all  pictures  were  taken  out  of  the  Church 
books ;  all  paintings  on  the  church  walls  were  removed ; 
churches  were  decorated  with  trees,  fruits,  and  the 
chase;  transgressors  were  cruelly  punished;  and  the 
citizens  of  Constantinople  had  to  take  an  oath  never 
again  to  worship  an  image.2 

The  contest  was  renewed  under  Empress  Irene  (780- 
802),  a  young,  beautiful,  ambitious,  wicked  Grecian,^ 
who  favoured  image  worship.  First,  she  proclaimed 
toleration  to  both  parties ;  then  denied  it  to  the  Icon- 
oclasts. The  highest  civil  dignities  were  given  to  the 
clergy  and  monks ;  and  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople 
became  her  prime  minister.  At  their  suggestion,  no 
doubt,  she  called  the  Council  of  Nicaea  in  787  to  undo 
the  work  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople  (754)- 
There  were  present  375  bishops,  and  Pope  Hadrian  sent 
two  representatives,  but  the  three  eastern  patriarchs 
were  unable  to  send  proxies,  so  two  eastern  monks 
were  appointed   to  sit  and  vote   for  all    the   patri- 

1  The  Greek  Church  regards  this  as  the  seventh  oecumenical 
council.     Finlay,  ii.,  57. 

2  Hefele,  iii.,  421. 


282     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


archs.1  The  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople 
were  nullified  because  heretical,  and  the  Iconoclasts 
anathematised.  Then  image  worship  was  defined  and 
authorised. 2  Many  Iconoclastic  bishops  were  induced 
to  renounce  their  heresy,  and  were  freed  from  the 
ban.  Finally,  an  image  was  brought  into  the  council 
and  fervently  and  reverently  kissed  by  all  present,  after 
which  the  council  adjourned. 

Leo  the  Armenian,  who  seized  the  throne  in  813, 
was  unfriendly  to  images.  He  called  a  synod  of 
Constantinople  in  815  in  which  the  acts  of  the  sec- 
ond Council  of  Nicsea  (787)  were  nullified.  He  for- 
bade the  lighting  of  lamps  and  burning  of  incense 
before  the  images  and  had  them  elevated  in  the  churches 
out  of  the  reach  of  the  people  in  order  to  prevent  their 
worship.  But  Leo's  widow,  Theodora,  restored  the 
usages.  Thus,  after  a  long,  bitter  struggle,  images 
were  finally  restored  in  the  churches  with  great  pomp 
and  ceremony  in  842.  The  "Festival  of  Orthodoxy" 
is  still  celebrated  on  February  19th  in  the  Greek  Church. 

After  the  great  victory  had  been  won  for  images, 
both  the  Latin  and  the  Greek  Churches  continued  their 
use.  The  puritanical  Iconoclastic  Controversy  was 
in  a  certain  sense  the  forerunner  of  the  ruthless  destruc- 
tion of  paintings  and  statues  in  England,  Holland, 
and  Germany  during  the  Reformation.  The  Council 
of  Trent  passed  finally  on  the  doctrine  and  use  of 
images  in  the  Catholic  Church.  3 

As  a  result_of  this  controversy,  the  Eastern  Chuxch 
was  greatly  weakened  through  dissensions,  checked 
in  the  growth  of  its  organisation,  robbed  of  its  inde- 

1  Neander,  iii.,  228;  Hefele,  iii.,  460,  549;  Schlosser,  279. 

2  Mansi,  xiii.,  378;  Hefele,  iii.,  486. 

3  Session  xxv.,  Dec.,  1563;  Schaft\  Creeds,  ii.     See  Cath.  Encyc. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated  283 


pendence,  made  a  mere  tool  of  the  state,  reformed  and 
purified  even  though  image  worship  finally  prevailed" 
because  it  was  better  understood,  and  compelled   to_ 
recognise  the  power  of  the  Pope. 

The  Western  Church,  on  the  other  hand,  was  forced 

to  define  thp  right  anH   wrong  »sr  nt  imagpg  ann   was~ 

weakened  somewhat  bv  r  s,rfogrri  likp  that  in  the 
Eastern  Church,  because  the  Frankish  Church  opposed 
THie  worship  of  images  East  and  West.  Pepin  had 
the  subject  discussed  in  a  synod  near  Paris  (767), 
in  which  sat  legates  from  Rome  and  Constantinople. 
It  was  decided  that  "images  of  saints  made  up  or 
painted  for  the  ornament  and  beauty  of  churches  might 
be  endured,  so  long  as  they  were  not  worshipped 
in  an  idolatrous  manner/7  Charles  the  Great,  aided^ 
by  Alcuin,  published  the  Caroline  books  denouncing 
all  abuses  in  the  worship  of  images,  though  tolerating 
them  for  ornamentation  and  devotion.1  The  cross 
and  relics,  however,  were  commended  (790). 2  The 
synod  of  Frankfort,  held  in  794,  rejected  the  recommen- 
dations of  the  seventh  oecumenical  Council  of  Nicaea 
and  condemned  image  worship.  3  A  synod  of  Paris  in 
827  renewed  the  action  of  794. 4  These  doctrines  were 
continued  by  Agobard  of  Lyons,  Claudius,  Bishop  of 
Turin,  the  Waldenses  in  Piedmont,  and  the  Lollards 
in  England.5 

Furthermore,  the  controversy  enabled  the  Pope  of 
Rome  to  declare  his  universal  supremacy  in   more 

•  See  Smith  and  Cheetham,  art.  on  "Images,"  for  brief  extracts 
in  English;  Mombert,  ch.  12. 

2  Schaff,  iv.,  §104;  Neander,  iii.,  233;  Gieseler,  ii.,  66;  Hefele,  iii.f 
694. 

3  Gieseler,  ii.,  67;  Hardwick,  78. 

*  Mansi,  xiv.,  415;  Hefele,  iv.,  41. 
s  Schaff,  iv.,  §105. 


284     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


sweeping  terms  than  ever  and  to  make  it  good  in  the 
West.  The  rise  of  the  Papacy,  as  the  dominating  force 
in  the  Church  of  the  West,  made  the  rupture  inevitable 
and  permanent.  The  series  of  protests  in  the  East 
against  the  assumptions  of  the  See  of  Rome  prevented 
any  complete  and  absolute  recognition  of  the  supremacy 
of  the  chair  of  St.  Peter.  As  the  years  passed,  the 
Eastern  Church  saw  that  independence  could  be 
secured  against  the  sweeping  imperial  claims  of  Rome 
only  by  a  declaration  of  total  separation.  The  rela- 
tions between  the  East  and  West  were  likewise  affected 
in  another  sense,  because  they  were  separated  politically 
when  Charles  the  Great  became  Emperor  of  the  West 
(800) ,  and  were  separated  religiously  when  the  allegiance 
of  the  Pope  was  transferred  from  the  eastern  authority 
to  the  newly  created  western  Emperor. 

The  growing  estrangement  between  the  Greek  and 
Roman  Churches,  which  had  its  origin  in  a  funda- 
mental difference  in  character,  temperament,  and  ideas, 
became  conspicuous  in  the  fourth  century,  reached  an 
incurable  stage  in  the  ninth  century,  and  culminated 
in  the  eleventh  century.  Pope  Nicholas  I.  in  863 
deposed  Photius  from  the  office  of  Patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople. Photius,  in  the  counter  synod  held  in 
867,  returned  the  compliment  by  deposing  the  Pope  for 
heresy  and  schism. * 

The  gulf  between  the  East  and  West  became  practi- 
cally irreparable  when  Nicholas  I.,  standing  firmly 
on  the  Petrine  theory  and  backed  up  by  the  Pseudo- 
Isidorian  Decretals,  wrote  to  Emperor  Michael: 

You  affirm  that  you  and  your  predecessors  have  been 

>  See  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  iii.,  348-423;  Milman,bk.  v.,  ch. 
4;  Neander,  iii.,  553-586;  Gieseler,  ii.,  216.  The  Sources  are  given 
in  Mansi,  xvi.,  and  Hardouin,  v.-vi. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated  285 


accustomed  to  command  us  and  ours;  we  utterly  deny  it. 
.  .  .  The  Roman  Church  encompasses  and  comprehends 
within  herself,  she  being  in  herself  the  universal  church ) 
the  mirror  and  model  of  that  which  she  embraces  within 
her  bosom.  Moreover,  this  vessel  was  shown  to  Peter 
alone,  and  he  alone  was  commanded  to  kill  and  eat;  as  in 
like  manner,  after  the  resurrection,  he  alone  of  all  the 
apostles  received  the  divine  command  to  draw  to  the  shore 
the  net  full  of  fishes.  And  if  unto  us  he  committed  that 
identical  commission — which  is  verily  and  indeed  so 
committed — to  embrace  in  our  paternal  arms  the  whole 
flock  of  Christ,  is  it  to  be  believed  that  we  surrender  to  you 
any  one  of  those  sheep  whom  he  hath  given  into  our 
keeping?1 

In   1054,  the  Pope  excommunicated  the  patriarch 


and  his  whole  Church  for  censuring  the  faith  of  Rome. 
,  The  courtesy  was  solemnly  returned  by  Constantinople 
»g,gainst  the  Roman  Church"!  Other  eastern  patriarchs 
adhered  to  the  See  of  Constantinople  and  the  rupture 
was  complete.  The  sack  of  Constantinople  by  Latin 
Christians  in  the  fourth  crusade  (thirteenth  century) 
widened  the  breach.  At  the  Council  of  Lyons,  1274, 
delegates  of  the  Eastern  Empire  abjured  the  schism, 
by  receiving  the  Nicene  Creed  with  "filioque"  in  it 
and  by  swearing  to  conform  to  the  Roman  faith  and 
to  accept  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope,  but  the  eastern 
patriarchs  refused  to  do  so.  When,  in  1 43  9  at  the  Coun- 
cil of  Florence,  the  Eastern  Emperor  and  churchmen 
signed  a  compact  of  reunion,  they  were  induced  to  ac- 
knowledge the  Pope  as  the  "successor  of  Peter  the  chief 
of  the  apostles,  and  the  vicar  of  Christ,  the  head  of  the 
whole  Church,  and  father  and  teacher  of  all  Christians, 

1  This  remarkable  letter  is  given  in  full  in  Baronius,  ed.  by 
Pagi,  ann.  867,  note  to  §4.  Parts  are  translated  in  Greenwood, 
Cafedra  Petri,  iii.,  364-371. 


286     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


to  whom  plenary  power  was  given  by  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  to  feed,  rule,  and  govern  the  universal  Church." 
Other  differences  were  patched  up.  The  Pope,  for  his 
part,  agreed  to  induce  the  rulers  of  the  West  to  go  to 
the  defence  of  the  East  against  the  Turks,  but  failed 
to  make  his  promise  good.  The  people  of  the  East  were 
sorely  disappointed  and  forced  the  repudiation  of  the 
agreement.  In  1453,  however,  Constantinople  fell  a 
prey  to  the  Mohammedan  Turks,  and  the  strength  of 
the  Eastern  Church  was  broken.  In  modern  times, 
papal  absolutism  and  .eastern — stagnation  have  pre- 
vented the  reunion. 1 

In    conclusion,    the    differences    and    resemblances 

hptwppr.  fhpi  CWepfc  nT1ri  Roman  q^rM^,  +.n-Hay  mjffhfc 
be  stated.  The  Greek  Chnrrh  rejects  t-hp  filinqiift 
in  the  Latin  creed ;  repudiates  the  immaculate  concep- 
tion of  the  Virgin  Mary  (1854)  >  and  denies  the  m^ 
fallibility  of  the  Roman  Pope  (1870).  All  the  clergy 
are  "popes"  in  the  Greek  Church  and  the  lower  clergy 
are  permitted  to  marry.  The  Greek  Church  gives  and 
the  Roman  Church  withholds  the  communion  wine 
from  the  laity.  The  Greek  Church  uses  leavened,  and 
the  Roman  Church  unleavened  bread  in  the  Eucharist. 
The  Greek  Church  holds  to  the  trine  immersion  in 
baptism,  repetition  of  Holy  Unction  in  illness,  and 
infant  communion.  There  is  a  difference  in  rites 
of  worship,  in  language,  in  art,  in  architecture,  and  in 
the  vestments  employed.  But  both  hold  the  funda- 
mentals in  the  Nicene  Creed ;  both  accept  all  the  doc- 
trinal decrees  of  the  seven  oecumenical  councils  from 
325  to  787  ;  both  practise  image  worship2 ;  both  accept 

»  Howard,  Schism  between  the  Orthodox  and  West.  Churches,  Lond., 
1802. 

2  The  Eastern  Church  uses  only  the  "  icon,"  a  flat  representation. 


Roman  and  Greek  Churches  Separated  287 


the  mediaeval  doctrine  against  which  the  Reformation 
protested;  both  believe  in  tradition  and  the  Bible; 
both  believe  in  the  seven  sacraments;  both  teach 
transubstantiation  ;  both  offer  masses  for  the  dead  and  w  <«  I 
the  living ;  both  sanction  priestly  absolution ;  both  have  *-*%  ! 
three  orders  of  ministry ;  both  are  episcopally  organ- 
ised on  a  hierarchical  basis ;  both  have  rites  and  cere- 
monies that  are  identical,  or  at  least  similar.  All  things 
considered,  therefore,  it  seems  that  the  resemblances 
are  far  more  striking  than  the  differences. 

From  now  on,  interest  in  Church  history  centres  in 
the  Roman  Church  of  western  Europe.  The  undignified 
quarrel  over  images  gave  the  Pope  an  occasion  to 
declare  his  absolute  independence  of  eastern  imperial 
rule.  That  fact  gave  a  new  bent  to  the  Roman  Church, 
forced  upon  it  a  more  genuine  unity,  compelled  it  to 
devote  all  its  energies  to  the  great  problems  in  the 
West,  and  enabled  it  to  attain  its  acme  under  Innocent 
III.  in  the  thirteenth  century.  Had  the  unsatisfactory 
relationship  with  the  Eastern  Church  not  been  severed 
the  history  of  the  mediaeval  Church  in  western  Europe 
would  have  been  very  different.  The  separation  must 
be  regarded,  therefore,  as  a  factor  of  no  small  moment 
in  that  process.  While  the  effective  missionary  ef- 
forts, having  their  source  and  purpose  in  Rome,  were 
winning  all  western  Europe  to  a  recognition  of  the 
Pope's  sovereignty,  it  was  very  essential  that  he 
should  completely  accomplish  his  independence  of 
Constantinople  so  that  he  would  have  a  free  hand  to 
work  out  the  problems  of  the  Western  Church. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — See  Chapter  IX. 


The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


2. — John  of  Damascus,  On  Holy  Images,  Transl. 
by  M.  H.  Allies.     Lond.,  1898.     See  Nic.  and 
Post-Nic.  Fathers,  ix.,  ch.  11-16. 
3. — Thatcher  and   McNeal,    A  Source  Book  for 
MedicBval  History.     N.  Y.,  1905. 
B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Bury,  I.  B.,  A  History  of  the  Later  Rom.  Emp. 

Lond.,  1889.     2  vols. 
2. — Finlay,    G.,    History   of   the   Byzantine    and 

Greek   Empires   from    716    to    1453.     Lond., 

1854. 
3. — Hefele,  C.  J.,  History  of  the  Councils,  v.,  260. 

Edinb.,   1871-96. 
4. — Howard,    G.    B.,    The   Schism    between    the 

Oriental  and  Western  Churches.     Lond.,  1892. 
5. — Neal,    J.    M.,    History   of    the   Holy   Eastern 

Church.     Lond.,  1850-73. 
6. — Oman,  C.  W.  C,  Story  of  the  Byzantine  Em- 
pire.    N.  Y.,  1892. 
7. — Stanley,   A.    P.,   Lectures  on  the  History  of 

the  Eastern  Church.     Lond.,  1883. 
8. — Tozer,  H.  F.,   The  Church  and  the  Eastern 

Empire.     N.  Y.,  1888. 
9. — Wells,  C.  L.,  The  Age  of  Charlemagne.     N.  Y., 

1898. 
11. — general: 

Adeney,  ch.  9.  Alzog,  ii.,  ch.  5,  p.  138  /., 
322  /.  Blunt,  i.,  ch.  9.  Bouzique,  i.,  ch.  2. 
Brock,  ch.  12-23.  Butler,  ch.  36,  51,  52,  53. 
Coxe,  Lect.  4,  sec.  5.  Darras,  ii.,  310,  324, 
464.  Dollinger,  iii.,  ch.  2,  sec.  2,  3,  8,  9. 
Fisher,  63,  117,  158.  Foulkes,  264  /.  Gib- 
bon, ch.  49,  60.  Gieseler,  ii.,  172,  199-208. 
Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  33.  Guericke  §37,  73.  Hard- 
wick,  ch.  7.  Hase,  sec.  140.  Hore,  ch.  7,  10, 11. 
Hurst,  i.,  510-525.  Jennings,  i.,  ch.  8.  Kurtz, 
i.,  403-412.  Milman,  ii.,  ch.  7-9.  Milner, 
i.,  445-446.  Moeller,  ii.,  13-17,  127,  222.  Mos- 
heim,  bk.  3,  cent.  8,  pt.  2,  ch.  3.  Neander,  ii., 
283-296;  iii.,  198.  Newman,  i.,  386,  423.  Rob- 
ertson, bk.  3,  ch.  4,  7.     Schaff,  sec.  100-106. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

RELATION  OF  THE   CHURCH   AND  STATE   UP  TO  THE  DIS- 
SOLUTION OF  THE  CAROLINGIAN  EMPIRE 

Outline:  I. — Church  and  state  before  Constantine.  II. — 
Church  and  state  from  Constantine  to  476.  III. — Period  of 
the  Ostrogothic  rule  (476-552).  IV. — Reunion  of  Italy  with  the 
Eastern  Empire.  V. — Alliance  between  the  Papacy  and  the 
Franks.  VI. — Restoration  of  the  Empire  in  the  West  in  800. 
VII. — Effect  of  the  rise  of  national  states  on  the  Church.  VIII. — 
Sources. 

BY  the  theory  of  the  Roman  constitution,  the 
Emperor  was  not  only  an  autocrat  in  all 
political  matters,  but  was  also  the  Pontifex 
Maximus  of  religions1 ;  consequently,  all  foreign  religions 
must  conform  to  the  constitution  or  else  perish  as  il- 
legal. The  political  philosophy  of  early  Christianity  in 
reference  to  the  Roman  Empire  was  not  very  clearly 
defined.  Jesus  taught  charity  and  love,  gave  the 
Golden  Rule  as  the  law  of  life,  but  apparently  was 
indifferent  as  to  civil  government.  He  took  no  part 
in  political  discussions;  said  "My  kingdom  is  not  of 
this  world";  disparaged  worldly  power  and  wealth, 
and  advised  the  rich  young  man : ' '  Sell  all  thou  hast  and 
give  it  to  the  poor."  He  did  recognise  the  duty  of 
tribute  to  the  state,  however,  saying  "Render  unto 
Caesar  the  things  that  are  Cassar's,"  but  did  little  more. 
The  Apostles  continued  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  em- 

1  Justinian,  Inst.,   i.,  ii.,  6. 

19  289 


290     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


phasised  equality  and  brotherhood;  organised  the 
Church  on  a  communistic,  democratic  basis ;  and  were 
likewise  indifferent  to  wealth  and  property.  They, 
too,  recognised  the  state  and  its  essential  institutions. 
Slaves  were  told  to  obey  their  masters. 1  Paul  was  very 
particular  to  explain  the  obligation  of  Christians  to  the 
state  and  said:  "Let  every  soul  be  subjected  unto  the 
higher  powers.  For  there  is  no  power  but  of  God."2 
He  advised  the  payment  of  taxes  as  a  just  requisition.3 
And  he  himself,  when  arrested  for  disturbing  the  peace, 
appealed  to  Rome.4  Peter  likewise  advised  Christians 
to  obey  "every  ordinance  of  man  for  the  Lord's  sake; 
whether  it  be  to  the  king  as  supreme ;  or  unto  governors, 
as  unto  them  that  are  sent  by  him."5 

The  early  Church  Fathers  made  no  additions  to 
the  political  science  of  Jesus  and  his  Apostles.  Ap- 
parently no  questions  of  seriously  conflicting  allegiance 
arose  during  the  whole  of  the  first  century.  As  in- 
dividuals these  early  Christians  no  doubt  performed 
all  the  duties  and  paid  all  the  contributions  demanded 
by  the  Empire.  From  a  strictly  legal  standpoint, 
however,  the  Church  was  not  incorporated  among  the 
recognised  cults,  that  is,  it  was  not,  like  Judaism,  a 
"religio  licita."  Nevertheless,  it  was  not  disturbed 
for  some  years.6  Things  must  have  gone  along,  for 
the  most  part,  in  a  customary  manner.  Pliny's  letter 
to  Trajan  (about  in)  describes  the  Christians  in 
Bythinia  as  law-abiding.       With  the  rapid  territorial 

»  Eph.  vi.,  5;  Col.  iii.,  22;  Tit.  ii.,  9;  1  Pet.  ii.,  18. 

2  Rom.  xiii.,  1-7;  cf.  Heb.  xiii.,  17;  1  Pet.  ii.,  13. 

3  Rom.  xiii.,  6-7. 

«  See  Tertullian,  Lib.  ad  Scap.,   for  a  later  recognition  of  the 
divine  right  theory. 
s  1  Peter  ii.,  13,  14. 
«  Tertullian,  ApoL,  c.  5  and  26. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         291 


and  numerical  increase  of  Christianity,  the  state  was 
forced  to  take  cognisance  of  it  and  the  inevitable 
conflict  occurred.  The  Christians  refused  to  conform 
to  Roman  worship  and  persecution  resulted.  Perse- 
cution in  time  produced,  on  the  part  of  many  Christ- 
ians, a  refusal  to  perform  the  duties  of  civil  and 
military  service,  but  it  cannot  be  proved  that  such 
hostility  was  universal.  Indeed  there  is  much  evidence 
to  show  a  general  disposition  to  compromise  with 
imperial  demands.  * 

With  respect  to  the  general  duty  of  obeying  the  law 
of  the  Empire  the  Fathers  of  the  ante-Constantine 
period  were  quite  unanimous  in  their  approval.  In 
fact  they  boasted  of  their  political  loyalty  and  denied 
all  accusations  to  the  contrary.  Justin  Martyr  said 
that  "wherever  we  are  we  pay  the  taxes  and  the  tribute 
imposed  ...  as  we  were  instructed  to  do  by  Him," 
and  "while  we  worship  God  alone  in  all  other  matters, 
we  cheerfully  submit  ourselves  to  you,  confessing  you 
to  be  the  kings  and  rulers  of  men."  Irenasus  asserted : 
"we  ought  to  obey  powers  and  earthly  authorities, 
inasmuch  as  they  are  constituted  not  by  the  devil, 
but  God."  These  passages,  and  many  others,  which 
are  undoubtedly  typical,  show  that  it  was  the  per- 
suasion of  the  Church  that  conformity  was  a  general 
obligation.  That  this  fealty  was  appreciated  is  seen 
in  the  fact  that  the  Church,  at  least  in  the  time  of 
Emperor  Alexander  Severus  (222),  was  permitted  to 
own  lands,  to  erect  churches,  to  elect  officers  openly, 
and  to  send  officials  to  court. 2  It  was  not,  however, 
until    312    that    these    rights    were    legalised.     One 

1  Tertullian,  Apol,   c.    34;  c.  42;  De  Corona  Milit.,  c.   11;  De 
Idololatria,  c.  17.     See  Milman,  bk.  ii.,  ch.  7. 
s  Milman,  ii.,  231;  Gibbon,  ch.  16. 


292     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


must  never  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  it  was  both  very 
easy  and  very  natural  for  the  clergy  and  the  people  to 
accommodate  themselves  to  the  new  order  of  things, 
and  to  recognise  in  these  new  relationships  a  re- 
production of  the  theocratic  constitution  of  God's 
subjects  under  the  old  covenant.  Indeed  it  was 
practically  impossible  for  the  masses  who  came  to 
march  under  the  cross  in  those  days  to  conceive  of  a 
Church  without  some  relation  to  the  state.  To-day 
to  a  modern  man's  eyes  appears  only  the  antagonism 
between  the  Church  and  state. 

There  was  a  most  striking  contrast,  from  the  stand- 
point of  political  science,  between  the  Roman  and 
Christian  religions.  The  Roman  Emperor  identi- 
fied religion  with  the  state;  Christianity  separated 
God  from  Caesar.  The  Roman  religion  was  restricted 
to  earth;  Christianity  made  the  world  to  come  the 
most  important  part  of  life.  The  Roman  religion 
was  only  for  Romans ;  Christianity  was  as  wide  as  the 
world.  Roman  paganism  fell  and  the  Roman  Empire 
perished,  but  Roman  Christianity,  clothed  in  their 
form,  arose  on  their  ruins  to  rule  the  world  for  more 
than  a  thousand  years. 1 

Constantine  legalised  Christianity,  but  thereby  sub- 
,  jected  it  to  the  state.  He  had  no  idea  whatever  of 
surrendering  to  it  any  of  his  autocratic  prerogatives. 
He  became  virtually  the  Pontifex  Maximus2  of  his  new 
religion  by  controlling  those  who  performed  the  sacred 
rites,  and  by  defining  its  faith,  discipline,  organisation, 
policy,  and  privileges.  He  enacted  legislation  for 
Christianity  just  as  his  predecessors  had  for  paganism. 
The  Church  recognised  its  subjection  to  the  Emperor 

i  Ranke,  Hist,  of  the  Popes. 

2  The  title  was  used  down  to  the  time  of  Gratian  in  380. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         293 


without  a  complaint  and  permitted  him  to  appoint 
and  depose  its  officers,  to  call  and  dismiss  synods  and 
councils,  like  Aries  (314)  and  Nicasa  (325),  and  almost 
to  replace  the  Holy  Ghost  itself  in  determining  the 
proceedings. *  This  marked  a  revolution  in  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Church  to  the  Empire,  for  each  made  a 
conquest  of   the  other. 

It  has  been  customary  for  Church  historians  quite 
generally  to  characterise  the  union  of  the  Church  and 
state  under  Constantine  as  an  unmitigated  curse 
that  gave  birth  to  a  multitude  of  evils  in  the  Church 
which  led  directly  to  the  Reformation.  That  conten- 
tion is  one-sided  and  unfair.  Whether  the  Church  and 
state  be  regarded  as  both  divine,  or  both  human, 
or  one  human  and  the  other  divine,  the  historical  fact 
remains  that  their  union  was  absolutely  necessary 
and  inevitable.  When  all  the  forces  and  factors  of  the 
time  are  carefully  and  duly  considered,  it  is  impossible 
to  conceive  of  any  other  solution  of  the  problem  in  the 
fourth  century. 2  That  the  union  did  paganise  and  ma- 
terialise the  Church  no  one  can  deny,3  but  in  compen- 
sation the  Empire  was  Christianised  and  spiritualised. 
The  resultant  was  mediaeval  Christianity  and  the  ec- 
clesiastical Empire.  The  Church,  without  the  strength 
it  received  from  the  state,  could  not  have  met  the 
barbarians  of  the  North,  the  Mohammedans  of  the 
South,  and  the  heretics  within,  and  successfully  con- 
quered the  first,  held  the  second  in  check,  and  subdued 
the  third.  Much  of  what  we  enjoy  to-day  along  the 
lines  of  culture,  law,  and  religion  is  due  in  great  measure 
to  that  alliance.     After  the  time  of  Constantine  the 

1  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  15. 

2  See  Schaff,  iii.,  §13. 

3  Ibid.,  §22,  23. 


294     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Church  becomes  such  a  vital  and  integral  part  of  the 
life  of  Europe  that  history  for  a  thousand  years  must 
be  viewed  through  the  eyes  of  the  Church  and  estimated 
by  her  standards. 

In  the  two  centuries  which  intervened  between  the 
time  of  Constantine  and  that  of  Justinian,  imperial 
legislation  directly  affecting  the  Church  in  all  its  in- 
stitutions made  rapid  progress.  The  successors  of 
Constantine  continued  his  policy.  Imperial  sanction 
was  necessary  for  the  validity  of  every  important 
act  in  connection  with  the  Church.  Councils  were 
called  and  dismissed  in  the  name  of  the  sovereign, 
and  their  proceedings  were  not  valid  without  his 
approval.  At  the  Council  of  Tyre  (335),  a  portion 
of  the  bishops  appealed  to  the  Emperor's  commissioner 
to  settle  the  dispute  about  the  Arian  question,  but 
he  declared  that  the  question  must  be  submitted  to  his 
imperial  master  for  final  decision  since  it  was  his 
province  to  legislate  on  all  matters  concerning  the 
Church. 1  Constantius  vetoed  a  portion  of  the  canons 
of  Remini  (360). 2  The  Emperors  Theodosius  II.  and 
Valentinian  III.  likewise  rebuked  the  Council  of  Ephe- 
sus  (43 1) ,  and  dictated  its  procedure. 3  The  Council  of 
Chalcedon  (451)  was  also  told  to  hurry  up  its  work 
because  the  imperial  commissioners  present  were 
needed  in  state  affairs.4  During  this  period,  however, 
it  is  possible  to  detect  pretensions  on  the  part  of 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  the  right  to  call  and  preside 
over  councils.5     Here  began  the  conflict  over  ecclesi- 


1  Harduin,  i.,  543;  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  13  ^F. 

2  Cod.  Theod.,  lib.  xvi.,  tit.  ii.,  1,15. 

3  Harduin,  i.,  1538. 
*  lb.,  ii.,  559. 

s  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  15. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State  295 


astical  sovereignty  which  was  to  end  in  a  complete 
victory  for  the  Roman  Church. 

The  later  Emperors  similarly  exercised  the  right  to 
decide  all  disputed  points  of  doctrine,  discipline,  and 
elections.  They  nominated,  or  at  least  confirmed,  the 
most  influential  metropolitans  and  patriarchs.  Thus 
in  377,  the  Emperor's  representative  decided  between 
two  rival  claimants  to  the  apostolic  see  of  Antioch. l 
Again,  the  Roman  prefect  decided  between  two  rival 
claimants  to  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  Ursinus  and  Da- 
masus,  in  favour  of  the  latter,  and  punished  adherents 
of  the  former. 2  When  rival  Popes  appealed  to  Hono- 
rius,  he  appointed  a  temporary  Pope  until  he  could 
examine  into  the  case.  Then  he  decided  in  favour 
of  Boniface  I.  and  issued  an  edict  to  prevent  the  re- 
currence of  such  a  state  of  affairs.3  The  Emperor  was 
the  court  of  last  appeal  in  all  ecclesiastical  cases.  This 
was  recognised  by  a  council  of  Rome  held  by  Ambrose 
in  378,  which  requested  of  Emperor  Gratian  that  when 
a  Roman  bishop  was  accused,  he  might  always  be 
tried  by  the  imperial  council.  *  The  best  evidence, 
however,  of  the  subordination  of  the  spiritual  to  the 
temporal  authority  in  this  period  is  found  in  the  legis- 
lation. The  whole  field  of  Church  government  and 
ecclesiastical  life  and  all  the  relations,  duties,  morals, 
and  acts  of  the  clergy  are  covered  in  the  civil  laws 
of  the  time.  Even  heresy  was  put  to  flight  by  impe- 
rial edict.5 

1  Theodoret,  v.,  3. 

2  Socrates,  iv.,  29. 

3  Goldast,  Const.  Imp.,  iii.,  587;  Harduin,  i.,  1238.  " 
*  Harduin,  i.,  842. 

s  The  laws  relating  to  the  Church  passed  between  the  time 
of  Constantine  and  the  promulgation  of  the  Theodosian  Code  in 
438  are  mostly  contained  in  the  sixteenth  book  of  that  code.     The 


296     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


During  the  period  of  Ostrogothic  rule  in  Italy  from 
476  to  552,  the  Roman  Church  made  a  few  weak  efforts 
to  assert  her  independence.  We  find,  for  instance,  a 
Roman  synod,  held  in  502,  resolving  that  no  layman 
has  a  right  to  interfere  in  Church  matters.  But  the 
Arian  Ostrogothic  rulers  declared  that  they  had  suc- 
ceeded to  the  Roman  Empire's  power  over  the  Church. 
Indeed  the  Theodosian  Code  was  practically  incorpo- 
rated in  the  Visigothic  Code  in  506  by  Alaric  II. 
Consequently,  Odoacer  issued  a  decree  forbidding 
the  alienation  of  Church  property.  Theodoric  in  498 
decided  between  two  rival  claimants  to  the  Papacy, 
Symmachus  and  Lawrence,  giving  the  former  the  papal 
chair  and  the  latter  a  bishopric. *  When  a  synod  was 
called  later  to  try  Symmachus  (501),  it  was  convened 
in  Theodoric's  name.  Theodoric  even  appointed  a 
"visitor"  to  reform  the  abuses  in  the  Church.  He  sent 
Pope  John  I.  to  the  eastern  Emperor  on  an  embassy, 
and  on  his  return,  dissatisfied  with  his  work,  threw 
him  into  prison,  where  he  died.  Athalaric  instructed 
Pope  John  II.  how  to  prevent  simony  in  episcopal 
and  papal  elections. 2 

Under  Justinian  the  Great  (527-565),  who  by 
.conquest  reunited  Italy  with  the  eastern  Empire 
in  552,  the  Popes  and  the  Western  Church  were  again 
subjected  to  the  eastern  rule.  Like  the  Patriarch  of 
Constantinople  the  Pope  was  now  the  nominee  of  the 
Emperor  and  could  be  removed  at  the  pleasure  of  the 
prince.     Sylverius,  made   Pope   by   the    Arian    Goth 

laws  passed  between  438  and  534  are  found  in  the  Justinian  Code 
which  was  published  in  revised  form  in  that  year.  See  Lea,  Stud. 
in  Ch.  Hist.,  16. 

1  Goldast,  iii.,  95,  615. 

2  Cassiodorus,  Varior.,  ix.,  15. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         297 


Theodatus,  was  therefore  deposed  and  exiled  by  the 
Emperor's  successful  general,  Belisarius,  and  a  new 
Pope  was  chosen.  Vigillus,  a  favourite  of  the  Empress, 
installed  as  Pope  by  Belisarius  (537),  was  peremptorily 
summoned  to  Constantinople  to  answer  for  his  conduct. 
There  a  synod  was  called,  and  he  was  excommunicated. 
His  successor,  Pelagius  I.,  was  apparently  appointed 
directly  by  the  Emperor.  Justinian,  like  Constantine, 
exercised  the  right  to  legislate  for  every  phase  of 
Church  life. 1  His  theory  was  that  '  'human  and  divine 
authority,"  that  is  civic  and  ecclesiastical  law,  "com- 
bining in  one  and  the  same  act,"  formed  "one  true 
and  perfect  law  for  all."2  He  meant  to  exercise  a 
spiritual  power  very  much  like  the  temporal  power 
he  wielded.  Hence  he  insisted  that  the  election  of  a 
Pope  in  Rome  by  the  clergy,  senate,  and  people  should 
not  be  valid  until  confirmed  by  him.  This  practically 
reduced  the  Pope  of  Rome  to  the  position  of  eastern 
bishops.  The  organisation  of  the  Church  was  guarded 
and  regulated.3  The  property  of  the  Church  was 
protected.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  clergy  was  clearly 
defined  and  minutely  regulated  as  an  extension  of  civil 
power.  In  all  cases  the  Emperor  was  the  court  of 
final  decision. 

This  arbitrary  interference  with  the  affairs  of  the 
Western  Church  by  the  imperial  authority  at  Constan- 
tinople brought  the  papal  hierarchy  to  the  brink 
of  ruin.  The  clergy  were  alarmed  at  this  invasion  of 
the  sacred  canons  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  and  the 

1  These  laws  are  found  in  the  Justinian  Code  and  in  the  Novella?, 
and  cover  the  period  from  534  to  565.  Excellent  translation  by 
Moyle,  Oxf.  1889. 

2  Novella?,  42. 

3  The  134th  Novella  is  a  small  code  in  itself. 


298    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

unity  of  the  Western  Church,  which  had  been  so  strong 
for  several  centuries,  was  seriously  threatened.     The 
clergy   of   Gaul   "silently  withdrew   from,   or   boldly 
renounced  their  communion  with  Rome;  the  Illyrian 
episcopacy  prepared  to   follow  their  example";  and 
Africa  became  defiant.1     Even  the  Italian  provinces 
like  Venetia  and  Liguria  became  disaffected.     Pope 
Pelagius   I.,  indebted  to  the  Emperor  for  his  office, 
was  forced  to  beg  the  intervention  of  the  secular  arm 
to  compel  the  ecclesiastical  rebels  to  continue  true 
to  their  allegiance  to  the  See  of   Peter.     Sorrowful 
indeed  was  this  spectacle  to  those  who  could  recall 
the  palmy  days  of  Leo  the  Great,  Felix,  Gelasius,  and 
Hormisdas,  who  had  imposed  their  will  on  all  ecclesias- 
tics, had  planted  the  banner  of  Roman  supremacy  in 
every  corner  of  Christendom,  and  had  even  imposed 
their  laws  on  princes.     But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  theory    on  which   Roman  leadership  rested 
had  not  been  assailed,  and  was  soon  to  reassert  itself. 

In  the  election  of  a  Pope  in  577,  the  Roman  clergy 
resumed  their  independence  and  ventured  to  consecrate 
and  to  inaugurate  a  successor  without  even  waiting 
for  imperial  license.  Hence  Pelagius  II.  was  the 
first  independently  elected  Pontiff  since  the  Byzantine 
conquest  of  Italy.  He  reasserted  the  universal  primacy 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  in  a  bold  tone,  and  declared  that 
anything  done  without  papal  authority  was  null  and 
void.2  Meanwhile  the  disaffection  in  the  West  had 
given  way  to  pronounced  loyalty  to  Rome. 

Even  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  did  not  question  the 
supremacy  of  the  temporal  power.  He  acknowledged 
the  Emperor  as  his  "earthly  master"  and  said  that 

«  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  ii.,  163. 
2  Baronius,  Ann.,  587,  §5. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         299 


God  had  given  the  ruler  dominion  even  over  the 
priesthood. l  When  Emperor  Maurice  renewed  an  old 
edict  prohibiting  monasteries  from  receiving  soldiers  as 
monks  (593),  Gregory  timidly  objected,  but  quieted 
his  conscience  by  saying:  "What  am  I  but  a  worm 
and  dust  thus  to  speak  to  my  masters?  ...  I  have 
done  what  was  my  duty  in  every  particular;  I  have 
obeyed  the  Emperor  and  have  not  hushed  in  silence 
what  I  felt  to  be  due  to  God."2  He  attempted, 
however  to  carry  out  the  spirit  of  the  law.  3  But 
Gregory  the  Great  was  willing  to  compromise  the 
substantial  prerogatives  of  his  office.  As  the  subject 
of  the  Emperor,  he  could  yield  a  point.  As  Pope 
he  stood  as  firm  as  a  rock,  yet  was  too  wise  to  provoke 
a  disruption  which  could  bring  nothing  but  injury 
to  the  unity  and  power  of  the  Church. 

Popes,  like  patriarchs,  were  required  to  keep  an 
"agent"  at  the  eastern  court.  The  Emperors  con- 
tinued to  insist  on  the  right  to  confirm  all  papal 
elections,  and,  of  course,  this  practically  put  the  election 
into  their  hands,  as  is  shown  by  the  elevation  of  so 
many  "agents"  to  the  papal  throne,  viz.,  Vigillus, 
Pelagius  I.,  Gregory  the  Great,  Sabinian,  etc.  The 
Popes,  on  their  installation,  were  expected  to  pay  tribute 
to  the  eastern  Emperor.4  Even  in  questions  of  doc- 
trine, the  Emperor  might  enforce  his  will  by  exiling  an 
obstinate  Pope,  as  in  the  case  of  Martin  I.  (655). 

During  the  period  from  552  to  800,  the  papal  power 
was  growing  stronger  all  the  time,  and  only  awaited  a 


1  Bk.  ii.,  letters  62,  65. 

2  Bk.    iii.,  letter  65.       Comp.  bk.    v.,  letter    40.      Greenwood, 
Cathedra  Petri,  ii.,  233. 

3  Bk.  vi.,  letter  2. 

*  Anastasius,  Biblioth.,  No.  81. 


300     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


r 


favourable  opportunity  to  issue  a  declaration  of  inde- 
pendence. The  Italians  hated  both  the  Greeks  and 
Lombards  as  foreign  masters.  Between  the  two  stood 
the  Pope  as  the  only  representative  of  Italian  nationality 
and  the  sole  champion  of  Italian  independence.  The 
Papacy  was  in  theory  democratic,  and  celibacy  made 
a  dynasty  impossible.  The  occasion  for  a  declaration 
of  independence  was  the  Iconoclastic  Controversy; 
the  leaders  were  Gregory  II.  and  Gregory  III.,  who 
formally  excommunicated  Emperor  Leo  and  his  hier- 
archy; and  the  new  ally  to  make  the  independence 
good  was  the  family  of  Pepin  in  Gaul  and  Germany. 
After  772,  the  papal  documents  do  not  bear  the  name 
of  the  eastern  Emperor. 1 

The  seventh  and  eighth  centuries  in  European  history 
reveal  the  elements  of  religious  and  political  life 
in  a  state  of  incessant  and  violent  fermentation. 
Sudden  changes  took  place  in  the  relative  position  of 
nations.  The  old  Empire  was  disintegrating  and 
new  kingdoms  were  appearing.  During  this  period 
of  political  transformation,  the  Church  was  the  only 
system  that  persisted  in  the  old  channel  that  it  had 
created  for  itself.  The  Papacy,  though  not  yet  an 
acknowledged  kingdom  in  the  world,  still  stood 
among  the  political  powers  as  a  self-existent  organisa- 
tion, exercising  an  influence  over  princes  and  subjects. 
The  governments  were  isolated,  divided,  anarchical. 
In  the  Church  alone  was  there  unity,  order,  method, 
organisation,  and  supreme  purpose.  There  alone  was 
found  facility  of  communication  and  cordial  interchange 
of  views.  The  Popes  of  Rome  kept  up  a  constant  inter- 
course with  all  nations  from  Asia  to  the  Atlantic  and 
constituted    the    one    recognised    unifying    force    in 

1  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  31. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         301 


Europe  standing  for  the  highest  ideals  of  the  age  along 
all  lines. 

Up  to  this  period  the  See  of  Rome  had  gone  far 
toward  establishing  an  ecclesiastical  monarchy.  Every 
principle  of  an  unlimited  religious  autocracy  had  been 
asserted  and  to  a  considerable  extent  established. 
The  outward  machinery  for  this  spiritual  absolutism 
had  been  created  and  partially  put  in  motion.  But 
many  obstacles  to  the  smooth  working  of  the 
system  were  still  encountered.  Chief  among  these 
impediments  was  the  strong  arm  of  the  eastern 
Empire.  Until  the  fetters  of  political_dependence  S 
were  broken,  the  Papacy  could  never  accomplish  its 
great  mission. 

Hitherto  the  Church  of  Rome  had  assumed  a  political 
headship  on  many  occasions,  but  it  was  the  result  of 
some  accidental  emergency  and  soon  disappeared. 
Nevertheless  the  experience  gained  in  this  exercise  of 
secular  authority  created  an  ambition  on  the  part  of 
the  Roman  Pontiffs  for  political  independence,  fur- 
nished precedents  for  future  claims,  and  led  the  Italians 
to  believe  that  the  head  of  the  Church  could  give  them 
efficient  government  in  temporal  affairs  as  well  as 
spiritual.  The  great  problem  before  the  successors  of 
St.  Peter  at  this  time  was  how  to  manage  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal ascendency  already  gained  over  the  Western  Church, 
so  as  to  render  it  serviceable  in  securing  that  political 
self-existence  so  essential  not  only  to  maintain  the 
ground  already  won  but  also  to  realise  their  high  hopes 
in  other  directions.  At  this  juncture  a  combination 
of  external  causes,  unparalleled  in  the  world's  history, 
came  in  to  favour  the  emancipation  of  the  Papacy 
from  the  last  feeble  bonds  of  a  nominal  dependency  )( 
and  to  permit  of  the  assumption  of  temporal  sovereignty 


•> 


302     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


virtually  if  not  in  recognised  title.  This  meant  the 
realisation  of  the  mediaeval  Church. 

Emperor  Leo's  attempt  to  abolish  the  worship  of 
images  in  Christendom  provoked  a  rebellion  in  Italy 
headed  by  the  Pope.  Luitprand,  seeing  his  oppor- 
tunity as  King  of  the  Lombards,  fell  on  the  exarchate 
as  the  champion  of  images  and  on  Rome  as  the  supposed 
ally  of  the  Emperor.  The  Pope,  perilously  placed 
between  a  heretic  and  an  invader,  appealed  for  help 
to  a  Catholic  chief  across  the  Alps  who  had  just  saved 
Christendom  by  defeating  the  Mohammedans  on  the 
field  of  Poitiers.  Gregory  III.  excommunicated  the 
eastern  Emperor  and  begged  Charles  Martel  to  hasten 
to  the  succour  of  the  Holy  Church.  Here  the  Roman 
Pontiff  leads  a  political  revolt  against  his  legitimate 
sovereign  and  appeals  to  a  foreign  power  to  make 
the  revolt  successful.  The  Bishop  of  Rome  has 
stepped  into  the  position  of  a  temporal  prince  with 
the  political  future  of  Italy  in  his  hands. 

The  alliance  of  the  Papacy  with  the  Franks  marks 
a  new  epoch  not  only  in  Church  history,  but  in  the 
history  of  western  Europe.  These  Franks  settled 
in  northern  France  about  250,  and  began  to  Germanise 
the  Celtic  and  Romanic  races  and  institutions  found 
there.  But  the  current  of  Roman  civilisation  was 
so  strong  that  the  Franks  were  swept  into  it  before 
they  realised  it.  Under  Go  vis,  they  were  converted 
directly  to  Roman  Christianity. x  With  the  aid  of  the 
Roman  Christians,  he  was  able  to  conquer  the  Arian 
princes  of  the  western  Goths,  Burgundians,  and  Bava- 
rians. He  and  his  successors  gave  the  Church  much 
property,  acquiesced  in  the  papal  claims,  and  helped 

«  See  Ch.  XII. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         303 


to  extend  the  papal  power  throughout  the  West,  though 
they  ruled  the  bishops  and  clergy  as  their  vassals.1 
Clovis,  himself,  convoked  synods  and  enacted  Church 
laws.  Later  rulers  followed  these  precedents. 2  Thus 
the  way  was  prepared  for  a  successful  alliance  between 
the  Frankish  ruler  and  the  Papacy.3 

The  house  of  Pepin  was  to  play  an  important  part 
in  this  new  arrangement.  In  622,  Pepin  of  Laudon, 
a  zealous  champion  of  Christianity,  was  made  mayor 
of  the  palace  in  Austrasia.  Pepin  of  Herstal,  grandson 
of  the  first  Pepin,  became  in  688  a  mayor  of  the  palace 
for  all  France  (d.  714).  He  succeeded  in  making  the 
office  hereditary  in  his  family.  A  series  of  infant  kings  * 
made  the  mayor  virtually  king.  Pepin  viewed  the 
Church  as  a  powerful  ally,  and  fostered  missionaries. 
Under  him,  twenty  bishoprics  were  founded,  and  the 
Church  secured  large  territorial  possessions,  s 

Charles  Martel,  after  a  contest  of  four  years,  succeeded 
to  his  father's  office  in  718.  He  ruled  France  with 
the  hand  of  a  master,  Christianised  the  Frisians  on  the 
north  by  force,  aided  Boniface,  the  apostle  of  the 
Germans,  defeated  the  Saracens  at  the  battle  of  Tours 
(732),  and  drove  them  back  into  Spain.6  On  the 
death  of  Theodoric  IV.  (737),  Charles  ruled  the  Franks 
directly  without  setting  up  another  puppet  king. 
Pope  Gregory  III.  in  739  sent  him  the  keys  of  St. 
Peter's  grave,  with  the  offer  of  the  sovereignty  of 
Rome  and  Italy  in  return  for  aid  against  the  Lombards. 7 

1  Hardwick,  Hist.  Christ.  Ch.  in  M.  A.,  54. 

2  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  84-87. 

3  Richter,  36. 

*  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  120. 

s  Bede,  v.,  10;  Migne,  vols.  86-88. 

6  Waitz,  iii.,  23,  note  3. 

7  Cf.  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  43. 


304    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


This  proffered  alliance  was  refused,  but  Charles  offered 
to  mediate  between  the  Pope  and  the  Lombards.1 
He  dealt  with  Church  endowments  as  with  any  other 
part  of  the  royal  domain.  He  gave  to  his  liege  Milo 
the  archbishoprics  of  Rheims  and  Treves,  and  to  his 
nephew  Hugh  the  archbishoprics  of  Rouen,  Paris,  and 
Bayeau  with  several  abbeys.  When  he  died  in  741,  "  he 
divided  his  kingdom  between  his  sons  " — a  proof  that  not 
only  the  office  of  mayor  of  the  palace,  but  also  that  of 
king,  had  become  practically  hereditary  in  his  family ; 
yet  Charles  Martel  had  never  assumed  the  title  of 
king. 

The  actual  alliance  of  the  Pope  with  the  Franks  was 
consummated  with  Pepin  the  Short.  The  occasion  for 
the  compact  was  the  Iconoclastic  Controversy  in  the 
East,  and  the  change  of  dynasty  in  the  West.  Pepin 
the  Short  accepted  what  Charles  Martel  had  refused. 
He  ruled  Neustria,  while  Carloman,  his  brother,  ruled 
Austrasia  (741-747) .  When  Carloman  became  a  monk 
(747),  Pepin  was  left  as  the  sole  ruler  of  all  France, 
but  still  under  a  phantom  Merovingian  king.  In 
751,  with  the  consent  of  the  Franks  in  their  annual  as- 
sembly, two  churchmen  were  sent  to  Rome  to  ask  Pope 
Zacharias,  acting  in  the  capacity  of  an  international 
arbiter,  whether  the  real  king  ought  not  to  take  the 
name  of  king.  The  Pope  answered  in  the  affirmative, 
and  thus  authorised  the  usurpation.2  Thus  a  new 
prerogative  of  the  Holy  See  came  into  active  existence. 
The  next  year  the  assembly  of  Soissons  elected  Pepin  and 
his  wife  King  and  Queen  of  France.  Childeric  III.,  the 
Merovingian  weakling,  was  shorn  of  both  his  royal 
hair  and  his  royal  crown,  and  shut  up  in  a  monastery. 

»  Richter,  i.,  200. 

2  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  120;  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §i4;Pertz,  i.,  136. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         305 


Boniface  in  all  probability  then  anointed  the  head 
appointed  by  the  Pope  to  wear  the  French  crown.1 

Through  this  alliance,  the  Pope  expected  to  make  the 
declaration  of  independence  from  the  eastern  Empire 
good,  to  increase  and  extend  papal  power  in  the  West, 
to  establish  a  precedent  for  deposing  and  enthroning 
kings — a  significant  thing  for  the  future, — and  to  gain 
material  help  against  the  Arian  Lombards  who  were 
threatening  Rome.2  In  753,  Pope  Stephen  II., 
who  succeeded  Zacharias  (752),  fled  to  France  from 
the  Lombards  to  implore  aid  from  Pepin  against  them. 
In  sack-cloth  and  ashes,  he  threw  himself  at  the  King's 
feet  and  would  not  rise  until  his  petition  was  granted.3 
The  Pope  himself  now  solemnly  anointed  Pepin  and  his 
family  with  royal  power,  at  St.  Denis,  and  made  him  and 
his  two  sons  patricians  of  Rome.  4  After  that  Pepin 
called  himself  "by  the  grace  of  God,  King  of  the 
Franks." 

Pepin  repaid  the  Pope  by  making  two  excursions 
into  Italy  against  the  Lombards.  He  took  an  army 
to  Italy  in  754,  defeated  the  Pope's  enemies,  and 
compelled  them  to  sign  a  treaty  respecting  the  rights 


1  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §14;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  6. 

2  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  122. 

3  Pertz,  i.,  293 ;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  44. 

•  4  lb.,  No.  6;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  122;  Migne,  lxxi.,  911.  The 
title  of  "patrician"  was  introduced  by  Constantine.  It  was  the 
name  of  a  rank,  not  of  an  office,  and  was  next  to  that  of  Emperor 
and  consul.  Hence  it  was  usually  conferred  upon  governors  of  the 
first  class,  and  even  upon  barbarian  chiefs  whom  the  Emperor  might 
wish  to  win.  Thus,  Odoacer,  Theodoric,  and  Clovis  had  all  received 
the  title  from  the  eastern  court.  Later  it  was  even  given  to 
Mohammedan  princes.  It  was  very  significant  now  that  the  Pope 
assumed  the  imperial  right  to  confer  it,  because  it  was  plainly  an 
illegal  usurpation.  It  made  Pepin  practically  the  viceroy  of 
Italy  and  the  protector  of  the  Papacy.    (See  Smith  and  Cheatham.) 


306     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  territory  of  the  Roman  See,  but  the  Franks  had 
scarcely  recrossed  the  Alps  before  the  promises  were 
broken.     Pepin,    therefore,    entered    Italy    a    second 
time  (755),  called  thither  by  the  famous  letter  pur- 
porting to  be  from  St.  Peter  himself.1      The  Lombard 
power  was  effectually  broken.     The  towns  and  lands  of 
the  exarchate  and  Romagna,  claimed  by  both  the  Lom- 
bards and  the  eastern  Emperor,  were  given  to  the  Pope.2 
This  is  the  famous    "Donation  of  Pepin"  by  which 
Z  his  envoy  laid  the  conquest  of  twenty-two  cities  at  the 
shrine  of  St.  Peter,  and  thus  began  the  temporal  power 
of  the  Pope. 3     The  act  of  donation  is  lost.4     The  Pope 
had  owned  tracts  of  land  all  over  the  Empire  before,  but 
now  he  becomes  through  this  gift  a  temporal  sovereign 
over  a  large  part  of  Italy  known  as  the  "Patrimony 
of  St.  Peter,"  or  the  "States  of  the  Church,"  which  con- 
tinued until  1870,  when  it  was  absorbed  into  the  new 
•4  kingdom  of  Italy.    This  act  changed  the  whole  later  his- 
<"tory  of  the  Papacy5  and  provoked  a  long  controversy 
<C ,  with  the  secular  powers  of  Europe.     Pepin  continued 
to  labour  to  build  up  the  Church  in  France  by  restoring 
confiscated  Church  property, 6  by  undertaking  needed 
reforms  in  discipline  and  organisation, 7  and  by  giving 
}£o  material  assistance  and  valuable  relics  to  many  religious 
\  foundations. 

This_  alliance  betwpp-n_±hf.  most  powerful  representa- 

1  Migne,  lxxxix.,  1004;  see  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  122;  Green- 
wood, Cathedra  Petri,  iii.,  388. 

2  Muratori,  iii.,  96;  Migne,  cxxviii.,  1098. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  45.     (Baronius,  Ann.,   755;  Migne,. 
cxxviii,  1099.)      SeeWiltsch,  Geog.  and  Statistics  of  the  Ch.,  i.,  264. 

*  Gibbon,  ch.  59. 

5  See  "  Donation  of  Constantine  "  in  Henderson,  319. 

6  Waitz,  iii.,  364. 

7  Pertz,  Leg.,  i.,  24;  Mansi,  xii.;  Migne,  xcvi.,  1501. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         307 


tive  of  the  Germanic  world  and  the  leader  of  Roman 
Christendom  in  the  West  was  one  of  the  most  eventful 


coalitions   in    the   history   of   Europe.  L  It   was   the 
event  upon  which  all  mediaeval  history  turned.     It ' 
created  a  new  political  organisation  in  western  Europe 
with  the   Pope  and   German   Emperor  at  t.hft  hend^ 
For  centuries,  it.  affected  every  institution  ja  western. 
Europe.     After  Pepin,  each  new  Pope  sent  a  delegation' 
with  the  key  and  flag  of  Rome  and  the  key  of   St.  " 
Peter's  tomb  to  the  Frankish  rulers  for  confirmation 
of  the  election  and  to  give  the  king  the  oath  of  allegiance. 
Thus,  the  strongest  western  king  assumed  the  same 
prerogative  over  the  Church  which  the  eastern  Em- 
peror had  exercised.     Pepin's  policy  was  followed  by 
Charles  the  Great,  the  German  Emperors,  the  Austrian 
Emperors,  Napoleon  the  Great,  and  Napoleon  III. 

The  next  important  step  in  the  relations  between. 
Church  and  state  was  the  restoration  of  the  Roman 
Empire  in  tne  West  in  800  by  Charles  the  Great^2  the 
sonof"Pepin.  Charles  was  born  in  7  42 ,  and  received  the 
education  of  a  warrior.  At  the  age  of  twelve,  he  was 
anointed  king,  with  his  father  and  brother,  by  Pope 
Stephen  II.  (754).  As  a  boy,  he  participated  in 
military  expeditions  and  gained  considerable  renown 
for  his  ability,  his  independence,  and  his  prowess. 
When  his  father  died  in  768,  he  ruled  jointly  with  his 
"brother  Carloman,  whom  he  apparently  hated  very 
bitterly,  and  with  whom  he  quarrelled  continually, 
until  771,  when  Carloman  died  and  Charles  assumed' 
his  rule  as  King  of  all  the  Franks. 

The  first  problem  which  engaged  his  attention  was 
to    strengthen    and    extend    his    kingdom.     This    he 

«  Adams,  Mediceval  Civilisation,  127. 

2  The  best  account  of  Charles  the  Great  in  English  is  Mombert's. 


308     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


accomplished  by  almost  incessant  military  expeditions, 
of  which  he  made  fifty-three.  His  domain  was  extended 
north,  east,  and   south.    The  Bretons  were  subdued 

"on  trie  north;  the  {Saxons  on  the  east  were  conquered 
after  cruelly  murdering  4000  prisoners,  laying  waste 

♦their  land  with  nre  and  sword,  and  transplanting  to, 000 

fomilioc     o1coTX7''hc>rA    ii~>     ( Tprmanv     anrl       n     Gem!    1       TVia 


families   elsewhere  in   Germany  and  m   Gaul. 


Slavs  beyond  the  Saxons,^  the  Bavarians"  in  the  south- 


east, the  Saracens  and  Basquesin~tne  souths  thej 
Avars  in  Pannonia.4  and  the  Lombards  in  Italy,  were 
all  subjugated.     The  result  of  this  military  activity  was 


that  Charles  ruled  over  France^nearlv  all  of  Italv^ 
a  large  part  of  Germany,  Holland  and  Belgium,  and  a 
cornerof  Spain.  Then  by  shrewd  marriage  alliances, 
he  cemented  these  conquests.  He  married  his  dukes 
and  counts  to  the  princesses  of  powerful  lords  and 
kings,  and  he  personally  took  as  his  wife,  in  turn,  a 
Lombard,  a  Swabian,  an  east  Frankish,  an  Alemannian 
princess,  and  even  proposed  marriage  to  the  eastern 
Empress.  He  assumed  the  crown  of  Lomba,rdyin77.^. 
All  parts  of  this  vast  realm  were  held  together  bya 
complete  system  of  royal  laws  regulating  the  whole 
life  of  his  people  even  in  the  minutest  details,  s 

Charles,  as  ''Patrician  of  Rome,"  was  no  less  active 
in  religious^  lines. _  He  inherited  the  alliance  with  the 
"Papacy  and  continued  it.     He  protected  the  Church 
against  the   Saracens  in   Spain,   the  pagans   to   the* 
north  and  east,  tEe^Arian  Lombards  in  Italy,  and  the  ^ 
eastern   Emperors.     After    freeing  the  Papacy    from 

i  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  129;  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §16,  17.     See 
Mombert,  ch.  3,  4. 

2  Mombert,  ch.  11. 

3  Ibid.,  ch.  5. 

4  Ibid.,  ch.  7. 

5  See  Waitz.     Ogg,  Source  Book,  §18,  19. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         309 


the  Lombards  in  774,  781,  and  799,  he  renewed  the 
^"Donation  of  Pepin"  and  made  some  valuable  ad- 
ditions.1    He  viewed   the   Pope,  however t  as  merely 
the  chief  bishop  in  his jrealm.     In  796  Pope  Leo  III.^ 
sent  him  the  key  and  flag  of  Rome  and  the  key  of_ 
St.  Peter's  tomb  as  tokens  of  submission;  and  three 
years  later  the  same  Pope  fled  to  CVmrles  for  safety^ 
and  succour.     He  reformed  and  reorganised  the  Church 
in  his  kingdom  and  made  himself  its  real  head-    He^ 
carried   on   the   missionary   labours   of   Boniface   by 
converting  the  Saxons  at  the  sword's  pointT  and  bv 
forcing  Christianity  upon  the  Avars.     He  preached  to 


the  whole  hierarchy,  held  Church  councils,  at 
admonished  the  Pope.     He  refused  to  champion  the, 

1  — ■*■ — -^  *"  ■■■■  ■"  ' 

Pope's  cause  in  the  Iconoclastic  Controversy,  but  took^ 
"a  sane  middle  ground  witna  leaning  toward  iccjaoclasrm. 

In  a  council  at  Frankfort,  he  presided,  and  had  the 
,  council  legislate  on  discipline  and   even   on  dogma 

(794) -2 

The  career  of  Charles  as  Emperor  of  the  Roman 
Empire  in  the  West  (800-8 1 4)  must  now  be  considered.  s 

Many  causes  seemed  to  be  operating  to  open  up  this 
new  field  for  his  masterly  ability.  A  woman,  having 
put  out  the  eyes  of  her  son,  was  ruling  in  the  East, 
contrary  to  the  Roman  constitution.  Charles  had 
carved  out  an  Empire  with  his  sword  and  was  undis- 
puted master  of  the  West.  He  was  the  recognised 
Emperor  in  power,  if  not  in  name.  He  had  become 
the  defender  of  the  Church  and  the  protector  of 
the  Pope.    To  assume  the  imperial  crown  was  not 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  46;  Wiltsch,  Geog.  and  Statistics  of 
the  Ch.,  i.,  265;  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  ii.,  415. 

2  See  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  47. 

3  Dollinger,  Empire  of  Charles  the  Great. 


3io    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


nearly  so  radical  or  unnatural  an  act,  then,  as  it 
might  seem.  In  7qq,  when  Popp  T,m  TTI.  fled  fromM 
mob   to   Charles  at   Paderborn,   Charles 


the  Roman 

gave  him  royal  ent.prtainropnfr  promised  aid,  notified 
his  Frankish  diet  of  his  intentions  (Aug.,  800) ^crossed 
the  Alps  within  army,  pnd  entered  Rome  in  joyous_ 
triumph  (Nov..  800).*  There  he  held  a  solemn  synod 
injSt.  Peter's  to  investigate  the  causes  of  the  riot  which 
Ahad  driven  the  Pope  out,  and  also  the  charges  made 
against  him.     The  Pontiff  was  freed  of  all  guilt. 2 

The  reward  for  Charles's  friendly  protection  soon' 
came.     On  Christmas  eve,  800,  while  he  was  kneeling  . 
In  prayer  before  the  altar  of  St.  Peter,  the  Church  being 
.  crowded  with  the  clergy,  soldiers,  and  common  people, 
the  Pope  suddenly  puJLa  golden  cro^n  upon  the  kind's 
jiead,  jvhilejjie  Romans  shouted:  "To  Charles  Augus- 
tus, crowned  by  God,  great  and  pacific  Kmparor-  at  the 
■Komans^iiiejtnd  victory."     The  Pope  then  adored  him^ 
as  Emperor  Augustus  by  bowing  the  knee  as  his  first 
subject.      The   drama    was   concluded    bv   anointing^ 
Charles  and  his  son  Pepin  with  the  sacred  oil.  3  ^ 

Whether  or  not  this  was  a  surprise  to  Charles  is 
a  disputed  question.  He  pretended  to  be  greatly 
surprised,  even  angered,  at  the  Pope's  trick,  and 
declared  that  he  would  not  have  gone  to  Church  had 
he  known  of  it.*  There  seems  to  be  little  doubt  about 
its  being  premeditated  by  the  Pope.  The  probability 
is  that  no  surprise  was  ever  more  carefully  prearranged 
on  both  sides.     It  is  easy  to  imagine  the  possibility 


1  Cf.  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  48. 

2  Ibid.,  No.  49.     Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  131. 

J  Ibid.,  i.,   134.     Thatcher    and    McNeal,   No. 
Book,  §20;  Mombert,  ch.  14. 
4  Eginhard,  §28. 


48;    Ogg,  Source 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         311 


of  its  being  planned  out  at.  Paderhorn  over  the  wine_ 
XUps  and  venison  stews.  It  was  very  clearly  a  fine 
piece  of  acting  on  the  part  of  both  the  Pope  and  the 
king.  Certainly  every  act  of  the  two  men  for  some 
time  previous  pointed  directly  and  unmistakably  to 
that  result. 1  If  we  can  believe  Charles's  own  repeated 
assertions,  the  exact  time  and  manner  may  have  been 
unknown  to  him,  but  for  years,  perhaps  as  early 
as  785,  Charles  had  spoken  of  the  possibility.  Alcuin, 
the  great  confidant  of  Charles  in  educational  and 
religious  matters,  knew  of  the  plan  before  800.  It 
had  naturally  often  been  suggested  to  the  king  by  his 
own  officers  and  nobles  and  most  likely  urged  by  the 
Popes  themselves. 2  In  fact  the  history  of  both  the 
Frankish  dynasty  and  the  Papacy  for  some  years  had 
been  steadily  tending  to  this  result  as  a  climax. 

The  coronation  itself  was  significant  for  many  i 
reasons.  Constitutionally  it  made  the  Pope  and 
jbharles  traitors  to  the  eastern  Emperor.^  Charles 
apparently  realised  this,  and,  again  being  a  widower, 
proposed  marrying  Irene,  the  eastern  Empress,  in 
order  to  unite  the  two  parts  of  the  Empire  and  thus 
avoid  trouble.3  But  so  frequently  had  the  Pope 
and  the  Romans  broken  their  allegiance  to  the 
East,  that  this  act  was  not  generally  viewed  as 
a  rebellion.  Furthermore,  they  assumed  that  they 
stood  upon  the  lofty  ground  of  right  in  making  the 
transfer.  Henceforth,  in  the  western  lists  of  Emperors, 
Charles  was  made  to  follow  Constantine  VI.  as  the 
sixty-eighth   successor   of   the   first   Roman   Caesar.4 

«  Muratori,  ii.,  312;  Waitz,  iii.,  174,  note. 
J  Dollinger,  Empire  of  Charles  the  Great. 

*  See  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Xo.  13,  14.     Bryce,  61-62. 

*  Waitz,  iii.,  184,  note. 


3i2     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


In  812,  the  eastern  Emperor  was  induced  to  recognise 
his  western  brother's  imperial  title.  The  old  Roman 
"Empire  was  now  restored  in  the  West  on  a  Germanic 
rather  than  aTRoman  basis,  a  fact  which  revealed  the 
*new  and  decisive  Germanic  element  in  the  West? Both 
*the  Emperor  and  the  Pope  were  benefited  beyond 
measurement  by  the  change,  and  it  is  difficult  to  say 
which  the  more.  A  Frankish  ruler  and  his  family 
had  become  the  successors  of  the  Caesars.  The  Pope  as- 
sumed that  he  had  created  the  Emperor  and  henceforth 
insisted  upon  the  necessity  of  papal  consecration  to  the 
validity  of  imperial  power.1  The  Pope  had  received 
a  powerful  defender  and  a  master  who  laboured  un- 
ceasingly to  build  up  the  Church.  The  foundation 
was  laid  for  the  two  rival  theories  of  the  relation  of 
Church  and  state,  viz.,  the  papal  theory  and  the 
imperial- theory.  Henceforth,  both  Pope  and  Emperor 
have  a  new  meaning  and  a  different  career.  A  new 
chapter  in  mediaeval  history  and  in  European  civilisa- 
tion was  introduced.  Christmas  800  "was  the  most 
important  day  for  the  next  thousand  years  of  the. 
world's  history."2 

£&e  results  of  the  rule  of  Charles  as  Emperor  ^800- 
814)  will  now  be  considered : 

~"i*  Religious.  As  Emperor,  Charles  regarded  him- 
self,  like  the  early  Caesars,  as  the  head  of  the  Church. 
"Hence  he  spent  the  winter  of  800-80 1  in  settling  religious 
affairs  in  Italy.  He  insisted  on  rigid  obedience  in  the 
hierarchy  and  the  subjection  of  all  ecclesiastical  author- 
ity to  the  imperial  will.     "The  Church  had  to  obey 

him,  not  he  the  Church."      The  Pope  was  his   chief 

»  Ludwig  II.  was  led  to  admit  that  right  in  871.      Thatcher  and 
McNeal,  No.  51,  52. 

2  Dollinger,  Empire  of  Charles  the  Great. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         313 


bishop  in  his  capital  city,  but  always  treated  with 
filial  respect  and  consideration.  The  bishops  were  his 
sworn  vassals,  like  counts.  The  appellate  power  of 
Rome  was  never  once  used  during  his  rule.  He 
held  the  appointment  of  the  higher  clergy  in  his  own 
hands,  though  after  803,  he  permitted  the  appearance 
of  a  popular  election.1  He  issued  edicts  on  Church 
matters  with  as  much  authority  as  in  purely  secular 
affairs.  In  fact,  in  his  laws  the  political  and  religious 
are  so  blended  that  they  can  hardly  be  separated.2 
His  conception  of  the  relation  of  the  Church  and  state 
has  played  a  vital  part  in  the  history  of  Europe  down 
to  the  present  time.  That  relationship  was  stated  by 
Charles  in  these  words :  "It  is  my  bounden  duty,  by  the 
help  of  the  divine  compassion,  everywhere  to  defend 
outwardly  by  arms  the  Holy  Church  of  Christ  against 
every  attack  of  the  heathen  and  every  devastation 
caused  by  unbelievers,  and  inwardly  to  defend  it  by  the 
recognition  of  the  general  faith.  But  it  is  your  duty, 
Holy  Father,  to  raise  your  hands  to  God,  as  Moses  did, 
and  to  support  my  military  services  by  your  prayers." a 
It  is  very  evident  that  in  his  mind  the  old  Roman  idea 
of  the  relation  of  Church  and  Empire  was  dominant. 
The  connection  of  Church  and  state,  which  Constantine 
founded,  he  established  on  a  firmer  basis.  The  ini- 
tiative and  decision  of  all  ecclesiastical  cases  were  in 
his  hands.  ^  He  called  Church  councils  and  presided 
over  them  just  as  he  summoned  his  privy  council.  The 
council  of  Aries  (813)  sent  him  its  canons  to  be  changed 

1  Gratian,  Decret.,  Dist.  63,  Can.  22;  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  8i„ 
89,  90. 

2  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  63. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  47. 

*  Hincmari  Inst.  Reg.,  ch.  34  and  35. 


314     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  ratified  at  will. *  Discipline,  faith,  and  doctrine  all 
came  within  his  jurisdiction.  He  even  put  filioque 
into  the  Nicene  Creed  against  the  Pope's  remonstrances 
(809) . 2  In  short,  he  organised,  systematised,  and  con- 
trolled the  Church  in  all  its  branches  as  a  necessary 
part  of  his  theocracy.  3  He  ruled  as  a  David,  or  a 
Josiah  rather  than  an  Augustus  or  a  Constantine. 
Churchmen  of  ability  held  seats  in  the  civil  assemblies 
and  were  given  important  political  positions.  The 
Church  was  forced  to  contribute  soldiers  and  money  to 
maintain  the  Empire,4  although  the  clergy  themselves 
in  801  were  forbidden  to  participate  in  military  life. 
At  the  same  time,  he  gave  the  Church  for  the  first  time 
the  legal  right  to  collect  tithes,  bestowed  rich  gifts,  and 
endowed  monasteries,  splendid  churches  and  cathedrals. 
No  wonder  a  satirical  priest  complained  that  the  power 
of  Peter  was  confined  to  heaven,  while  the  Church 
militant  was  the  property  of  the  king  of  the  Franks. 
The  Pope  and  clergy  gladly  acquiesced  in  the  usurpa- 
tion of  Charles  as  they  did  in  that  of  Constantine 
and  even  gave  him  the  papal  title  of  "Bishop  of 
Bishops  "  and  "Daviri\."  The  grateful  Pope  Adrian  in 
a  council  of  fifty-three  bishops  gave  him  the  right  to 
name  successors  for  the  Holy  See.5  This  was  little 
more,  however,  than  the  transference  to  Charles 
of  a  right  exercised  by  all  the  eastern  Emperors. 
Stephen  IV.  decreed  that  no  Pope  could  be  elected 
save   in   the   presence   of  imperial   delegates    (815).6 

1  Harduin,  iv.,  1006. 

2  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  64-65. 

3  Bryce,  Holy  Rom.  Emp.,  65. 

4  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §  22;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  136. 

5  This  is  now  regarded  by  some  authorities  as  a  forgery.     Lea, 
Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist. 

6  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  38;  Gratian,  Decret.,  Dist.  63,  Can.  28. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         315 


Pope  Paschal  III.  had  the  great  patron  of  the 
Church  canonised.  Even  the  Patriarch  of  Jeru- 
salem recognised  him  as  the  head  of  Christendom 
and  sent  him  the  keys  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  on  Mount 
Calvary  and  the  flag  of  the  city.  * 

2.  Political.  Charles  clearly' differentiated  between 
his  office  as  king  and  as  Emperor.  In  recognition  of  his 
new  dignity,  he  laid  aside  his  German  roval  costumeL 
and  donned  the  Roman  imperial  tunic,  chlamys,  and 
sandals. 2  He  ordered  that  '  'every  man  in  his  whole 
realm  be  he  clergyman  or  be  he  layman,  shall  renew 
to  him  as  Emperor  the  vow  of  fidelity  previously 
taken  to  him  as  king,"  and  that  "those  who  have  not 
yet  taken  the  former  vow,  shall  now  do  likewise, 
even  down  to  boys  twelve  years  of  age"  (802) .  3  Rome 
was  the  capital  of  his  Empire;  Aachen,  of  his  German 
Iringdom He  divided  his  Empire  among  his  three" 
sons  as  kings,  but  the  death  of  two  of  them  left  Louis 
"both  king  and  Emperor.  ^  The  Empire  which  he 
carved  out  with  the  sword  was  now  unified  and  ruled 
by  imperial  law  instead  of  tradition  and  custom. 
His  Empire  embraced  all  western  continental  Europe 
except  central  and  southern  Spain  and  southern  Italy, 
ft  included  Germans  as  well  as  Romans  .Slavs  Celts. 
and  Greeks,  and  was  held  together  by  an  imperial 
army.j  It  united  the  Teutonic,  civilisation  with  t.hfc 
Romanic  on  a  Christian  basis.-,  It  was  divided  into 
twenty-two  archbishoprics. 

Charles,  as  the  new  Constantine  of  the  West,  was  the 


1  Ann.  Laur.,  188. 

2  Milman,  Hist,  of  hat.  Christ.,  ii.,  459- 

'  Emerton,  Med.  Europe,  7;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  140. 

4  Charta  Divisionis,  806. 

s  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  135-137. 


316     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


absolute  sovereign  of  this  realm.  His  laws  covered 
every  detail  in  the  whole  life  of  his  people.1  Bishops 
were  forbidden  to  keep  falcons;  nuns  must  not  write 
love  letters ;  the  kind  of  altar  pieces  used  in  Churches 
was  specified ;  priests  were  not  to  wear  shoes  in  divine 
services.  A  pure  life  was  ordered  for  monks.  In- 
structions were  given  to  farmers  for  feeding  hens  and 
roosters ;  the  kind  of  apples  to  be  grown  was  prescribed ; 
wine-presses  and  not  feet-presses  were  to  be  used. 
Even  the  prices  of  food  and  of  clothes  were  regulated 
by  law — a  fur  coat,  it  was  decreed,  should  sell  for 
thirty  shillings,  a  cloth  coat  for  ten  shillings.2  The 
Empire  was  divided  into  districts  and  marks,  ruled  over 
by  imperial  "missi"  and  counts,  who  executed  their 
master's  will.  s  Yet  notwithstanding  these  magnificent 
and  successful  efforts  to^thwartthe  Teutonic  tendencies 
to  localisation,  each  tribe  was  permitted  to  retain  its 
own  laws,  its  hereditary  chiefs,  and  its  free  popular 
assemblies  of  freemen. 

Charles  never  recognised  the  validity  of  the  papal 
theory  of  the  right  of  the  Pope  to  crown  and  depose 
kings  by  virtue  of  his  own  coronation  in  800.  When  he 
associated  his  son  Louis  with  him  in  rule  (813),  Louis 
entered  the  Church  with  the  king's  crown  already 
upon  his  head.  Charles  then  ordered  him  to  take  the 
royal  crown  off  and  put  on  an  imperial  crown  which 
lay  on  the  Church  altar.  Neither  the  Pope's  presence 
nor  his  sanction  was  asked.  After  Charles's  death, 
however,  the  Pope  carried  the  crown  of  Constantine 
to  Germany  and  coronated  Louis  with  it  (816),  and, 

1  Translations  and  Reprints,  ?  Henderson,  189. 

2  Lecky,  ii.,  259. 

3  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §  21 ;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  9;  Robinson, 
Readings,  i.,  139. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         317 


before  that  time,   his  biographer  does  not   call  him 
Emperor. 1 

1     3 .     Educational.     The  reign  of  Charles  the  Great 
stands  out  as  the  sun  between  the  intellectual  night 
that    preceded   and    the   daylight   that    followed    his 
,rule. 2     He  employed  the  Church  as  the  best  means  for, 
furthering  the  education  of  his  Empire.     The  clergy 
and  monks  became  the  teachers  and  writers,:  the  monas- 
teries  and  churches  were  used  ps  f|i^  ppa-t-.q  nf  je^rrpng-x- 
Jtne  schoolrooms  and  schnnlhn^^s.      He    issued    im- 
portant educational   laws  which  practically  created  a. 
very   crude   public    school  system   and    required     all_ 
boys  to  have  a  general  elementary  education.     His  pur- 
pose was  to  make  good  Christians  and  good  subjects. 3 
The  centre  of  his  whole  educational  system  was  his_ 
famous  "Court  School,"  the  very  heart  of  Christian^ 
culture  in  Europe^     In  it,  called  from  every  section.^ 
were  the  leading  scholars,  divines,  poets  and  historians, 
of  Europe.  ^  In  addition  to  helping  to  educate  the 
young  princes  of  the  country,  they  enpap-erl  in  importanF 
literary  activities...  They  compiled  a  German  grammar, 
collected  old  German  songs  and  minstrels,  correctecf 
the  Latin  Bible,   wrote  the  Caroline  books,  collected 
manuscripts,    revived    the    classics,    and   studied  the  ~ 
Church  Fathers.4   _. 

A  careful  analysis  of  the  character  of  Charles  the 
Great  shows  that  he  was  a  sincere  Christian  and  faithful 
churchgoer,  a  great  almsgiver  and  very  kind  to  the 
poor,  and  a  man  who  devoted  his  life  to  the  upbuilding 

»  Eginhard,  Ann.,  813.    Read  the  case  of  Louis  and  Lothair  817 
Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  42. 

2  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §23;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  10,  11,  12. 

3  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  144,  145;  Transl.  and  Reprints;  Mullin- 
ger,  Schools  of  Charles  the  Great. 

4  Mombert,  ch.  10. 


318    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


of  a  Christian  civilisation. x  Yet  he  was  guilty  of  deeds 
which  a  higher  conception  of  Christian  morals  condemns 
as  un-Christian.  He  sa.rrrifir:p.d  thousands  of  liyps-to, 
his  passions  and  ambitions  ^for  thirty  years,  he  waged 
a  war  of  extermination  against  the  Saxons  and  murdered 
more  than  4000  prisoners  in  cold  blood.  Like  Mo- 
hammed, he  made  his^motto.  submission  to  Christianity 
or  death.  Christians  of  that  day,  for  the  most  part, 
pronounced  his  policy  right,  although  some  of  the 
greatest,  like  Alcuin,  denounced* it.  He  had  nine, 
wives  and  concubines,  and,  like  Henry  VIII.  of  England. 
,  had  little  conscience  in  disposingj^Tthem^  He  was  not 
highly  cultured,  yet  he  spoke  Latin  with  ease  and  knew 
some  Greek.  When  an  old  man,  he  learned  to  write 
and  deserves  great  credit  for  the  manner  in  which  he 
encouraged  education.  He  cultivated  the  society  of 
the  most  cultured  men  in  Europe  and  from  them 
imbibed  much.  At  me^s  he  had  read^e-iijeroic  deeds 
of  his  ancestors,  or  stsme  work  of  the  Church  Fathers 
like  Augustine's  City  of  God.  ^As  a  warrior  and 
statesman,  only  Alexander  the  Great,  Julius  Caesar, 
and  Constantine  before  his  day  can  be  compared 
with  him.  He  was  the  first  and  greatest  of  all  the 
German  Emperors.  Since  his  time,  only  Otto  the 
Great,  Peter  the  Great,  Frederick  the  Great,  and  Napo- 
leon the  Great,  have  any  claim  to  rank  as  his  peers. 
The  Moses  of  the  Middle  Ages,  he  left  an  indelible 
stamp  of  his  genius  on  Germany  and  France,  continues 
to  be  the  only  common  hero  of  both  of  these  great 
nations,  and  through  them  modified  the  whole  western 
world.2 

»  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §15;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  7;Mombert, 
ch.  6. 

2  See  Eginhard  for  the  best  pen  picture  of  the  personal  appear- 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         319 


Eight  years  before  his  death,  Charles  the  Great  made 
his  three  sons  kings. »  This  act  would  have  proved  fatal 
to  the  Empire.  Charles  must  have  known  from  the 
writings  of  Gregory  of  Tours,  the  dangers  of  such 
an  arrangement.  The  division  made  among  his  sons 
was  unnatural,  because  it  lacked  unity  in  race  and 
territory,  but  the  death  of  Charles  and  Pepin,  the  eldest 
and  second  sons,  prevented  imperial  suicide.  Charles 
the  Great  then  solemnly  crowned  the  surviving  son, 
Louis,  as  Emperor  in  813.  Louis  the  Pious  (814-840) 
sought  to  preserve  both  the  Carolingian  practice  of 
division  and  the  integrity  of  the  Empire.  At  Aachen, 
in  817,  to  prevent  the  Empire's  being  "broken  by  man 
lest  thereby  a  scandal,  to  the  Holy  Church  might  arise," 
Louis  made  his  eldest  son,  Lothair,  co-Emperor, 
and,  with  the  consent  of  the  people,  crowned  him.2 
The  younger  sons  were  made  kings  but  sub  seniore 
fratre.  Their  territorial  districts  were  clearly  denned 
and  elaborate  instructions  were  given  about  their 
various  relations.  3  In  819,  Louis  married  again  and 
soon  a  fourth  son,  Charles  the  Bald,  appeared  to 
complicate  matters  (823).  Louis  then  made  a  new 
division  of  the  Empire  in  order  to  provide  for  the  new 
claimant.  *  A  long  list  of  territorial  changes,  and  dis- 
graceful, ruinous,  internecine  wars  resulted. 

Louis  the  Pious  died  in  840,  and  was  succeeded  b^ 


ance  and  habits  of  this  wonderful  man.  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  126. 
'  Louis,  the  youngest,  had  Aquataine,  Gascony,  Septimania, 
Provence,  and  a  part  of  Burgundy.  Pepin,  the  second  son,  had 
Italy,  Bavaria,  Almania,  and  a  part  of  the  Alpine  country.  Charles, 
the  eldest,  received  all  the  rest — old  France,  Thuringia,  Saxony, 
and  Frisia. 

2  Henderson,  201. 

3  Emerton,  18,  19. 

4  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  50. 


320     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Lothair  as  sole  Emperor-  His  brothers,  Louis  and 
Charles  (Pepin  was  now  dead),  rebelled  against  him 
and  forced  him  to  restrict  his  possessions  to  Italy 
and  a  narrow  strip  running  from  Italy  to  the  North 
Sea  (843).  But  Lothair,  tired  of  the  cares  of  this  life  _ 
retired  to  a  monastery  in  855  after  dividing  his  imperial _ 
territory  among  his  three  sons. 

As  a  result  of  the  Carolingian  policy  of  division,  the 
Empire  so  skilfully  constructed  by  Charles  the  Great, 
was  almost  destroyed.  Division  of  rule  meant  division 
of  resources.  The  successors  of  Charles  the  Great  were 
men  of  inferior  ability .  His  son,  Louis  the  Pious,  was 
a  weak,  easily  influenced  ruler  and  completely  under 
the  thumbs  of  the  clergy.  He  made  some  noble 
efforts  to  reform  the  court,  but  only  aroused  the  enmity 
of  the  aristocracy.  Lothair,  Louis  II.,  and  Charles  the 
Bald  were  Emperors  of  as  short-sighted  a  policy  and 
of  as  little  ability.  Civil  wars  were  almost  incessant; 
nobles  held  in  subjection  by  the  great  Charles  reasserted 
their  independence ;  the  Northmen,1  Slavs,  Hungarians 2 
and  Saracens  began  to  make  disastrous  inroads ;  im- 
perial laws  were  disregarded ;  and  by  the  end  of  the 
ninth  century,  the  Empire  of  Charles  the  Great  was 
little  more  than  an  empty  title  hardly  worth  fighting 
for.  3 

Another   significant    result   of   the   decline    of    the 
Carolingian  Empire  was   the   rise  of  modern  states. 
"By jthe_treaty  of  Verdunin  843 ,4  Louis  the  German,^ 
(d.  876)  was  given  Germany  east  of  the  Rhine  \  Charles 

1  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §27;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  15,  20; 
Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  150-155,  157,  163. 

2  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  21. 

3  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §26,  28;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  158. 

4  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  17,  18;  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §25. 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         321 


tVip  "RfllH  (c\.  877)  received  what  is  approximately 
Frarine  of  to-r|av:  and  Lothair  as  Emperor  (d.  8^0  was  | 
left  Italy  nnd  n  narrow  strip  to  the  North  Sea  with  the 
twni_pa.pit.ak  in  ifr.  To  confirm  the  treaty  of  Verdun, 
»Louis  and  Charles  with  their  followers,  took  the  famous 
Strassburg  oaths. 1  Louis  and  the  French  army 
took  the  oath  in  Latin;  Charles  and  the  Germans 
took  it  in  German;  and  this  is  the  first  recognition 
in  Europe  of  differences  of  race  and  language  as  a 
basis  for  political  action.2  The  treaty  of  Meersen* 
in  870  completed  the  separation  of  Italy,  Germany, 
and  France  by  dividing  the  "strip  of  trouble"  given 
to  Lothair  in  843.  Here  was  the  beginning  of  me- 
diaeval and  modern  France,  Germany,  and  Italy. 
The  Carolingian  Empire  virtually  ended  with  Charles 
the  Fat  (888).  Disintegration  soon  divided  Europe 
among  a  multitude  of  petty  feudal  sovereigns  with 
warring  policies  and  interests.4 

Ecclesiastically,     the    Papacy     was     immediately 
strengthened.  _  The    supremacy    of    the    state    over 
the    Church,  which    Charles    the    Great    established 
and  which  Louis  the  Pious  had  inherited,  but  did  B 
not  use  to  much  advantage,*  was   removed.     This 

»  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  16;  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §24;  Robinson, 
Readings,  i.,  433. 

2  Emerton,  Med.  Europe,  26-28. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  19. 

*  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  22,  23,  24,  25. 

s  He  did  insist,  however,  upon  his  dominion  over  Rome  and  over 
the  Pope  as  his  vassal.  Pope  Stephen  IV.  at  once  caused  the  Romans 
to  swear  fealty  to  the  Emperor  and  ordained  that  the  consecration 
of  the  Pope  must  take  place  in  the  presence  of  the  imperial  am- 
bassadors. His  son  Lothair  was  crowned  Emperor  in  Rome  and 
repeatedly  repaired  thither  to  protect  the  Holy  See.  Another  son, 
Louis,  was  also  anointed  king  by  Pope  Sergius  in  Rome.  This 
act  strengthened  the  papal  claim  to  control  elections  to  secular 


322     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


^release  from  secular  control  furnished  an  excellent 
occasion  and  opportunity  for  the  rapid  growth  of 
the  papal  theory  which  culminated  in  the  lofty  claim 
of  Pope  Nicholas  I.  to  independence  of  imperial  control 
and  supremacy  over  it.  Again  and  again  the  jPopp.^ 
was  called  upon  to  act  as  arbitrator  in  the  disputes  and 
wars.  The  power  of  bishops  and  metropolitans  was, 
likewise  increased  and  for  a  similar  reason,  but  the 
general  decline  in  civilisation  carried  the  Church  in- 
evitably with  it.  The  anarchy  and  confusion  which 
resulted,  formed  an  excellent  cover  for  the  promulga- 
tion of  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals.  Ultimately 
the  Papacy  was  weakened  by  the  decline  of  the  Empire 
and  the  rise  of  national  states,  because  there  was  a 
tendency  to  create  national  churches  and  to  set  up 
kings  who  questioned  the  Pope's  claim  to  political 
supremacy.  Indirectly  it  led  to  the  Protestant 
Revolution. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

i. — New  Testament. 

2. — New  Testament  Apocrypha. 

3. — The  Church  Fathers.     See  Chap.  X. 

4. — Henderson,     Historical    Documents    of     the 

Middle  Ages.     Bohn.  Lib. 
5. — Univ  of  Penn.,   Translations  and  Reprints, 

iv.,  No.  1,  2 ;  v.,  4,  5. 
6. — Eginhard,    Life  of   Charles   the  Great.      Tr. 

by  S.  E.  Turner.     N.  Y.,  1880. 
7. — Robinson,    Readings   in    European  History, 

vol.  i. 
8. — Thatcher    and    McNeal,    Source    Book    for- 

Mediaeval  History. 

power.  In  871  Louis  II.  acknowledged  his  divine  right  to  imperial 
rule  to  be  derived  from  papal  sanction.  Another  step  was  taken 
when  the  council  of  Aix-la-Chapelle  deposed  Emperor  Lothair  (842). 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         323 


9. — Ogg,  Source  Book  of  Mediaeval  History. 
10. — Theodosian  Code. 
11. — Justinian  Code. 

Bibliographical  Note : — Nearly  all  the  important 
sources  for  a  study  of  this  subject  are  in  Latin. 
Among  them  are,  Mansi,  Sacrorum  Concilior- 
rurn;  Jaffe\  Regesta  Pontificum;  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici;  Corpus  Juris  Civilis;  Pertz,  Mon- 
umenta  Historica  Germania;  Niebuhr,  Corpus 
Byzantince;  Migne,  Patrologia;  Potthast, 
Bibliotheca  Historica  Medii  ALvi. 

B—  SECONDARY: 

1. — special: 

1. — Allies,  T.  W.,  Church,  and  State  as  Seen  in 
the  Formation  of  Christendom.  Lond.,  1882. 
2. — Armitage,  W.,  Sketches  of  the  Church  and 
State  in  the  First  Eight  Centuries.  Lond. ,  1888. 
3. — Bryce,  The  Holy  Roman  Empire.  Var.  eds. 
4. — Bury,  J.  B.,  The  Later  Roman  Empire.  Edinb., 

1889.     2  vols. 
5. — Carr,  A.,  The  Church  and  the  Roman  Empire. 

Lond.,  1887. 
6. — Church,  R.  W.,  Relations  between  Church  and 
State.     Lond.,  1881.     Beginnings  of  the  Mid- 
dle. Ages.     Lond.,  1895. 
7. — Croke,  A.  D.,  History  of  the  Church  under  the 

Roman  Empire  (to  476).     Lond.,  1873. 
8. — Cutts,  E.  L.,  Charlemagne  and  His  Times. 
Lond.,  1878.     Union   of   Church   and   State. 
Lond.,  1881. 
9. — Emerton,  E.,  Introduction  to  the  Middle  Ages. 
Bost.,  1888.     Medieval  Europe.     Bost.,  1894. 
10. — Fisher,  H.  A.  L.,  The  Medieval  Empire. 
11. — Geffcken,    H.,    Church    and    State.     Lond., 

1877.     2  vols. 
12. — Gibbon,  E.,  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman 

Empire.     Var.  eds. 
13. — Gierke,  O.,  Political  Theories  of  the  Middle 

Ages.     Lond.,  1900. 
14. — Greenwood,  A.  D.,  Empire  and  Papacy  in 

the  Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1896. 
15. — Greenwood,  T.,  Cathedra  Petri.   Lond.,  1859- 
72.     5  vols. 


324    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


1 6. — Gregorovius,    F.    A.,    Rome   in   the   Middle 

Ages.     Lond.,  1900. 
17. — Gosselin,  J.  E.  A.,  Power  of  the  Pope  During 

the  Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1853. 
18. — Hardy,  E.  G.,  Christianity  and  the  Roman 

Government.     Lond.,  1893. 
19. — Hodgkin,  T.,  Italy  and  Her  Invaders.     Oxf., 

1892-9.     Charles    the    Great.     Lond.,     1896. 
I  Theodosius.     Oxf.,  1889.     Theodoric.     N.  Y., 

1891. 
20. — Hussey,  R.,  Rise  of  the  Papal  Power.     Lond., 

1863. 
21. — Hergenrother,  J.  A.  G.,  The  Catholic  Church 

and  the  Christian  State.     Lond.,  1876.    2  vols. 
22. — James,   G.   P.   R.,  History  of  Charlemagne. 

Lond.,  1832. 
23. — Lea,  H.  C,  Studies  in  Church  History.     Phil., 

1869. 
24. — Mann,  H.  K.,  The  Lives  of  the  Popes  in  the 

Early  Middle  Ages    Lond. ,  1 90 5 . 
25. — Manning,    H.    E.,    The   Temporal  Power   of 

the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ.     Lond.,  1862. 
26. — Mombert,  J.  I.,  History  of  Charles  the  Great. 

N.  Y.,  1888. 
27.— Oman,  C.  W.  C,  The  Dark  Ages  (476-918). 

Lond.,  1893. 
28. — Pressense,    E.    de,    History   of   Church   and 

State.     Lond.,  1869. 
29. — Tozer,  H.  F.,    The  Church  and  the  Eastern 

Empire.     Lond.,  1888. 
30. — Wells,  C.  L.,  The  Age  of  Charlemagne.     N.  Y., 

1897. 
31. — Workman,  H.  B.,  Church  of  the  West  in  the 
Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1898. 
11. — general: 

Alzog,  ii.,  92-104,  184.  Butler,  ch.  30,  31, 
55,  56,  57.  Chantrel,  pd.  3,  ch.  1.  Cheetham, 
ch.  9.  Crooks,  ch.  24,  33.  Dollinger,  i.,  ch.  1, 
sec.  9-10;  ii.,  ch.  5,  sec.  1;  iii.,  ch.  4,  sec. 
1.  Dunning,  131-160.  Fisher,  161,  168,  244. 
Gieseler,  i.,  191-204,  419;  ii.,  71,  119,  153,  220, 
237.  Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  31-32.  Guericke,  i., 
sec.  69;  Guizot,  i.,  ch.  7-12.  Hardwick,  ch.  6, 
sec.  2.    Hase,  134-146,  171-173.     Hurst,  i.,  161- 


Relation  of  Church  and  State         325 


180,  325-341,  410,  427.  473-495-  Jennings,  L,  ch. 
6,  8.  Kurtz,  i.,  235-247,  483-488.  Leavitt,  ch. 
1-12.  Mahan,  bk.  4,  ch.  13.  Milman,  ii.,  4,  130, 
429;  iii.,  1-109.  Moeller,  ii.,  1-2,  84-93,  99~ 
108.  Mosheim,  bk.  3,  pt.  2,  ch.  2,  sec.  7-13. 
Neander,  iii.,  1-112, 174-195; v.,  117-132, 144. 
Robertson,  i.,  294-297,  486,  517;  ii.,^  122- 
149.  Robinson,  ch.  4,  6,  7,  8.  SchafE,  ii.,  90; 
iii.,  203-264. 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE     PSEUDO-ISIDORIAN     DECRETALS     AND     THE     PAPAL 
CONSTITUTION 

Outline:  I. — What  were  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals? 
II. — Condition  of  Europe  when  the  Decretals  appeared.  III. — 
Purpose  of  the  forgery.  IV. — Character  and  composition.  V. — 
Time,  place,  and  personality,  of  authorship.  VI. — Significance  and 
results.  VII. — Nicholas  I.  and  papal  supremacy.  VIII. — Decline 
of  spirituality  in  the  Church.     IX. — Sources. 

THE  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals1  were  a  curious 
collection  of  documents,  both  genuine  and 
forged,  which  appeared  in  western  Europe 
about  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  under  the  name 
of  Isidore  Mercator,  to  give  the  Church  a  definite, 
written  constitution.  They  were  a  stupendous  forgery 
■ — the  most  audacious  and  pious  fraud  ever  perpetrated 
in  the  history  of  the  Church — worked  out  with  admir- 
able skill  and  consummate  ingeniousness.  Forgery  was 
a  common  thing  in  those  days,  and  it  was  generally 
believed  that  all  things  which  upheld  the  doctrines  and 
prerogatives  of  the  Church  of  God  were  allowable.  2 

When  these  false  letters  appeared,  the  Empire  of 
Qharles    was    falling   to   pieces    under   his    wrangling 

1  A  decretal,  in  the  strict  canonical  sense,  is  an  authoritative 
rescript  of  a  Pope  given  in  reply  to  some  question  propounded  to  him, 
just  as  a  decree  is  an  ordinance  enacted  by  him,  with  the  advice  of 
his  clergy,  but  not  drawn  from  him  by  previous  inquiry.  See 
Gieseler,  pd.  2,  ch.  3;  Cath.  Encyc. 

2  Janus,  The  Pope  and  the  Council;  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  46. 

326 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals      327 


grandsons.  Anarchy  and  confusion  were  rampant ; 
might  was  the  only  recognised  law.  Feudalism  with  its 
decentralising  influences  was  rapidly  prevailing  through  - 
out  Europe.  "The  Church  also  reflected  this  sad  state 
of  affairs.  The  Pope  was  reduced  to  a  vassal  of  the 
Emperor.  Metropolitans  were  in  league  with  the 
political  rulers  and  even  helped  to  plunder  the  bishoprics 
and  oppress  the  priests.  The  bishops  were  masterly 
secular  princes  and  landed  nobles ;  hence  their  persons 
had  lost  their  sanctity,  and  they  were  persecuted  by 
their  archbishops  and  robbed  by  their  sovereigns. 
The  Bishop  of  Lyons  wrote:  "No  condition  of  man 
whether  free  or  unfree  is  so  insecure  in  the  possession  of 
his  property  as  the  priest.   .   .   .  Not  only  the  estates 

of  the  Church,  but  even  the  churches  themselves  are 

l  — - — — — — — — ■■ ^ ^^^>^ 

sold."     The  lower  clergy  suffered  from  the  tyranny 

"and  lawlessness  of  the  day;  the  laity  were  similarly 
demoralised.  The  synod  of  Aachen  in  836  protested 
against  the  contempt  into  which  the  clergy  had  fallen 
wTOfthe  ungodly  laity.  The  age,  too,  was  not  criticaL  _ 
In  fact,  it  was  an  impious  triing  to  disbelieve  anything 
•connected  with  the  Bible,  the  Church,  or  with  sacred 
tradition.  It  was  an  era  of  superstitions  and  legends. 
No  period,  therefore  could  have  been  better  adapted 
than  that  for  the  promulgation  of  such  a  magnificent 

'system  of  fabrications. 

There  are  divergent  theories  as  to  the  purpose  of 
these  falsified  epistles:  (1)  Some  maintain  that  the 
sole  object  was  to  give  the  Church  a  constitution  of  a 
definite  form  and  character.  (2)  Others  hold  that  the 
mtention  was  to  present  iinqiiestjormhte  proof  nf  thft_ 

*papal  theory  of  supremacy  by  filling  in  the  fatal  gap 
between  the  time  of  Jesus  and  Constantino      It  was 

"dangerous  to  make  the  origin  of  the  Church  dependent 


328     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Nt 


upon  an  Emperor's  fiat :  hence,  it  was  necessary  to 
.elevate  the  See  of  Rome  by  clothing  the  Pope  with  | 
antiquity,  spiritual  majesty,  and  supreme  authority.1 
venerable  Rome  was  made  to  furnish  the  necessary 
documents  from  St.  Peter  onward  to  supplement  the 
Bible  and  the  Church  Fathers  with  manufactured 
tradition.  (3)  Still  others  assert  that  the  object  was 
to  give  the  Church  a  general  code  of  discipline  in  the 
anarchy  and  confusion  of  the  time.2  (4)  Most  scholars 
believe,  however,  that  the  real  motive  was  to  free  the 
bishops  from  their  dependence  upon  the  state,  upon  the 
metropolitans,  and  upon  the  provincial  synods  which 
were  under  the  control  of  the  rulers. 3 

The  motive  for  the  publication  of  this  code  of 
decretals  is  thus  stated  by  the  authors  themselves : 

Many  good  Christians  are  reduced  to  silence,  and  com- 
pelled to  bear  the  sins  of  others  against  their  own  better 
knowledge,  because  they  are  unprovided  with  documents 
by  which  they  might  convince  ecclesiastical  judges  of  the 
truth  of  what  they  know  to  be  the  law ;  seeing  that  though 
what  they  allege  may  be  altogether  right,  yet  it  is  not 
heeded  by  the  judges  unless  it  be  confirmed  by  written 
documents,  or  by  recorded  decisions,  or  made  to  appear  in 
the  course  of  some  known  judicial  proceeding. 

The  object  of  the  compilation  may  be  found  also 
in  these  words : 

We  have  likewise  inserted  the  decretal  epistles  of  certain 
apostolic  men — that  is,  of  Clement,  Anacletus,  Evaristus, 
and  others  who  are  their  successors,  indeed  as  many  as  we 
have  been  able  to  find,  down  to  Pope  Sylvester;  after  these 

1  Theiner. 

2  Moehler. 

3  Kunst,  Wasserschleben,  D5llinger,  Moeller,  Hatch. 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals       329 


we  have  annexed  the  rest  of  the  decretals  of  the  Roman 
prelates  down  to  Gregory  the  Great,  together  with  certain 
epistles  of  that  pontiff;  in  all  which,  by  virtue  of  the  dignity 
of  the  Apostolic  See,  resides  an  authority  equal  to  that 
of  the  councils;  so  that,  the  discipline  of  the  ecclesiastical 
order  being  thus  by  our  labours  reduced  and  digested 
into  one  body  of  law,  the  holy  bishops  may  be  instructed 
in  the  entire  "rule  of  the  fathers";  and  thus  obedient 
ministers  and  people  may  be  imbued  with  spiritual  pre- 
cedents, and  be  no  longer  deceived  by  the  practices  of 
the  wicked.  For  there  are  many  who  by  reason  of 
their  wickedness  and  cupidity  bring  accusations  against 
the  priests  of  the  Lord,  to  their  great  oppression  and 
ruin.  Therefore  the  Holy  Fathers  did  institute  laws, 
which  they  called  holy  canons,  which,  however,  the 
evil-minded  have  often  made  the  instruments  of  un- 
just charges,  or  even  possessed  themselves  of  the  goods 
of  the  innocent. 

The  canons  were  insufficient  to  meet  the  evils 
of  the  day.  Some  remedy  must  be  found  of  equal 
if  not  greater  authority.  The  decretals  of  the  Roman 
Pontiffs  were  seized  for  this  holy  purpose.  Many 
such  decretals  were  known  to  the  Church.  But  there 
was  a  fatal  hiatus  of  two  centuries  and  a  half  after  the 
founding  of  the  See  of  Peter.  That  chasm  must  be 
bridged  over  by  documents  which  would  prove  that 
the  divine  headship  of  Peter  wTas  consciously  exercised 
by  all  his  successors.  With  such  indisputable  evidence 
the  supremacy  of  Rome  would  be  established  beyond 
question,  and  the  entire  hierarchy  would  be  benefited. 
The  ascendancy  of  the  Church  over  the  state  would  be 
established.  Papal  sovereignty  would  be  acknow- 
ledged. Episcopal  independence  of  secular  control 
would  be  secured. 

The  sources  of  the  Isidorian  Decretals,  now  satis- 


> 


33°    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


factorily  determined,  were:  the  writings  of  the  Church 
Fathers,  particularly  Rufinus  (d.  410) ;  the  works  of 
Cassiodorus  (b.  470);  Jerome's  Vulgate;  the  Liber 
Pontificates;  the  general  theological  literature  down 
to  the  ninth  century;  various  collections  of  laws  like 
Breviarium  Alaricianum,  the  Lex  Visigothorum,  and  the 
Frankish  capitularies;  the  genuine  archives  of  the 
Church  like  papal  letters  and  decretals,  Church  canons, 
and  minutes  of  Church  councils ;  the  correspondence  of 
Archbishop  Boniface  (d.  754) ;  and  the  forgeries. 

Before  this  collection  appeared  there  had  been  several 
others  formed  in  the  Western  Church:1 

1.  Dionysius  Exiguus,  a  Scythian,  who  lived  at 
Rome  as  a  monk  in  the  sixth  century,  made  a  collection 
of  the  fifty  Apostolic  Canons ;  decrees  of  the  Eastern 
and  African  Church  councils  from  375  to  451;  and 
letters  of  Popes  from  314  to  498.  This  collection  was 
used  by  Charles  the  Great  as  a  basis  in  part  for  the 
Frankish  laws. 

2.  Isidore  of  Seville,  early  in  the  seventh  century, 
made  a  second  collection,  very  much  like  the  first 
one  just  described. 

3.  Then  Isidore  Mercator,  about  the  middle  of  the 
ninth  century  put  out  a  third  collection  which  embraced 
those  by  Exiguus  and  Isidore  of  Seville  and  included 
all  the  forgeries.  This  last  collection  opens  with  a 
preface,  then  has  a  spurious  letter  from  Aurelius  to 
Damasus,  and  a  forged  answer;  a  selection  from  the 
fourth  council  of  Toledo;  a  list  of  councils;  and  two 
spurious  letters  from  Jerome  to  Damasus,  with  replies. 
After  these  documents  the  collection  proper  begins.  It 
consists  of  three  parts.     The  first  includes  the  fifty 

»  Other  collections  had  been  made  in  the  East.  See  Smith 
and  Cheetham,  art.  on  "Canon  Law." 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals       331 


Apostolic  Canons;  fifty -nine  spurious  decretals  from 
Clement  to  Melchiades  (90-314);  a  treatise  On  the 
Primitive  Church  and  the  Council  of  Niccza;  and  the 
spurious  "Donation  of  Constantine."1  The  second 
part  opens  with  a  genuine  quotation  from  the  Spanish 
collection  of  the  decretals  of  the  Greek,  African,  Gallic, 
and  Spanish  councils  down  to  683.  The  third  part 
also  begins  with  a  quotation  from  the  Hispania  and 
then  gives  the  decretals  of  the  Popes  from  Sylvester 
(d.  335)  to  Gregory  II.  (d.  731),  of  which  thirty -five  are 
forged  and  others  contain  many  interpolations;  and, 
finally,  the  Capitula  Angilramni. 

Evidences  of  fraud  are  to  be  found  in  the  uniformity 
of  language,  the  impurity  of  style,  the  use  of  words  of 
a  late  origin  for  an  earlier  period,  many  clumsy  ana- 
chronisms, the  total  absence  of  all  proof  of  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  early  decretals,  the  evident  effort  to 
meet  contemporary  prejudice,  and  the  fact  that  there 
is  no  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  the  forged  letters 
until  incorporated  in  this  collection.  Many  absurdities 
also  appear:  for  instance,  Roman  bishops  of  the  second 
and  third  centuries  write  in  Frankish  Latin  of  the 
ninth  century  in  the  spirit  of  post-Nicene  orthodoxy 
and  about  the  mediaeval  relationship  of  the  Church 
and  state.  These  early  bishops  quote  the  Vulgate  of 
Jerome  as  amended  under  Charles  the  Great.  Pope 
Victor  (202)  writes  a  letter  to  Bishop  Theophilus  of 
Alexandria  (383)  about  a  second-century  controversy. 
Pope  Anacletus  speaks  of  patriarchs,  metropolitans,  and 
primates  long  before  they  arose.  Pope  Melchiades, 
who  died  in  314,  mentions  the  Nicene  Council  which 
was  held  in  325.  Pope  Zephyrinus  (218)  appeals  to  the 
laws  of  Christian  Emperors  before  Constantine  was  born. 

•  Henderson,  319. 


332     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Just  how  soon  they  were  discovered  to  be  forgeries, 
is  a  question  that  has  aroused  considerable  discussion. 
Pope  Nicholas  I.  must  have  known  that  they  were  false, 
but  they  suited  his  purpose  so  well  that  he  sanctioned 
them.  Some  of  the  Latin  bishops  saw  through  the 
forgery,  but,  for  various  reasons,  kept  silent.  A  few 
of  the  Frankish  bishops  denounced  them  and  objected 
to  their  reception  as  law.  Even  Hincmar,  although 
he  did  so  much  to  establish  them,  declared  them  to 
be  spurious  and  called  them  a  "mouse-trap"  and  a 
"cup  of  poison  with  the  brim  besmeared  with  honey." 
The  synod  of  Rheims  in  991  opposed  the  Isidorian 
principles.  Stephen  of  Tournai  (d.  1203)  called 
them  into  question.  Peter  Comester  in  his  Historia 
Scholastica  (twelfth  century)  granted  the  ingeniousness 
of  the  author.  Dante  alluded  to  the  fiction  and 
grumbled  about  the  "Donation  of  Constantine"  in 
these  words: 

Ah,  Constantine!  of  how  much  ill  the  cause — 
Not  thy  conversion,  but  those  rich  domains 
That  the  first  wealthy  Pope  received  of  thee. 1 

Nicholas  of  Cusa  questioned  their  authenticity. 2  Chan- 
cellor Gerson  of  the  University  of  Paris,  boldly  asserted 
that  the  Papacy  was  founded  on  fraud.  3  Marsiglio 
of  Padua4  and  Wiclif  took  the  same  view.  Johannus 
Turrecrenta  was  skeptical  about  them.s  Erasmus 
pronounced  against  them.  The  authors  of  the  Magde- 
burg   Centuries    conclusively    proved    in    detail    their 

1  Inferno,  bk.  xix.,  112-118. 

2  De  Concordia  Catholica,  bk.  iii.,  2. 

3  De  Reform.  Eccl.,  c.  5. 

*  Dejensor  Pacts,  ii.,  c.  28. 
5  Sum.  Eccl.,  vol.  ii.,  10 1. 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals      333 


fraudulent  character.  Calvin  took  the  same  view,1 
and  De  Moulin  and  Le  Conte  helped  to  establish  the  fact 
of  forgery.  David  Blondel,  a  Reformed  divine,  made 
the  exposure  unquestionable  against  the  attempted 
vindication  of  the  Jesuit,  Torres.  Still  since  it  is  so 
difficult  to  separate  the  true  from  the  false,  their  in- 
fluence was  perpetuated  beyond  this  period.  It  was 
not  an  easy  thing  for  an  infallible  Church  to  abandon 
ground  once  assumed.  The  fruits  of  the  forgery 
could  not  be  surrendered.  Catholic  and  Protestant 
historians  alike  now  agree,  however,  that  they  were 
for  the  most  part  fictitious. 

There  has  been  a  wide  divergency  of  view  as  to  the 
place,  time,  and  authorship.  A  few  earlier  scholars2 
held  that  they  originated  in  Rome.  This  is  now 
rejected  by  all  modern  scholars,  because  their  arrival 
in  Rome  is  almost  exactly  known.  One  year  Pope 
Nicholas  I.  is  ignorant  of  them,  the  next  he  asserts  their 
authenticity.3  They  were  probably  carried  to  Rome 
by  Rothod  in  864. 4  Many  contemporaries  believed  that 
they  came  from  Spain  as  the  work  of  Isidore  of  Seville, 
but  it  is  generally  acknowledged  now  that  they  were 
created  in  the  Frankish  Empire  because  the  language 
swarms  with  Gallicisms,  the  style,  phrases,  and  words 
are  of  the  Frankish  period,  and  the  frequent  use  of 
the  correspondence  of  Boniface  shows  that  the  archives 
of  Mayence  were  consulted.  It  is  probable  that  the 
first  collection  was  made  at  Mayence,  and  the  later 
and  larger  collection  may  have  been  made  at  Rheims. 

In  matter  of   time,  they    seem   to   have  been   an 

1  Institutes,  iv.,  7,  11,  20. 

2  Febronius,  Eichorn,  Theiner,  Rostell,  Luden. 

3  Mansi,  xv.,  694. 
*  Kurtz,  i.,  82. 


334     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


evolution  beginning  with  the  collection  of  Dionysius 
Exiguus  in  the  sixth  century,  increased  by  Isidore  of 
Seville  in  the  seventh  century,  amplified  by  Isidore 
Mercator  (Pseudo  Isidore)  with  forgeries  in  the  ninth 
century,  and  appeared  in  their  final  form  in  the  eleventh 
century.1  Their  frequent  contradiction  and  disregard 
of  well-known  history  suggests  a  composition  covering 
years.  Some  of  the  forgeries  were  undoubtedly  used 
by  Charles  the  Great,  and  the  Donation  of  Constantine 
is  perhaps  still  older.2  Passages  from  the  Council  of 
Paris  held  in  829  are  literally  quoted,  hence  the  collec- 
tion by  Isidore  Mercator  must  have  been  made  after 
that  date.  On  the  other  hand,  the  collection  was 
used  in  857  by  the  French  synod  of  Chiersy,3  in  859  by 
Hincmar  of  Rheims,  and  in  865  by  Pope  Nicholas  I.4 
The  conclusion  can  be  drawn,  then,  that  the  collection 
of  Isidore  Mercator  must  have  appeared  sometime  be- 
tween 829  and  857.  Furthermore,  the  frequent  com- 
plaint about  ecclesiastical  disorders,  the  deposition  of 
bishops  without  trial,  frivolous  divorces,  and  frequent 
sacrilege,  best  fit  the  period  of  civil  war  and  confusion 
among  the  grandsons  of  Charles  the  Great. 

There  is  likewise  divergence  of  opinion  as  to  the 
authorship.  The  name  of  the  compiler,  Isidore  Merca- 
tor, led  to  the  early  erroneous  belief  that  Isidore  of 
Seville,  the  eminent  canonist,  was  the  author;  and, 
consequently,  when  the  mistake  was  established,  the 
author  was  dubbed  "Pseudo  Isidore,"  a  name  used 
to  the  present  day.  Scholars  differ  widely  in  their 
efforts  to  identify  this  "Pseudo  Isidore"  and  suggest 

1  Niedner,  p.  397. 

2  Hardwick,  Church  History,  148,  note. 

3  Mon.  Ger.,  i.,  452. 
*  Mansi,  xv.,  694. 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals       335 


Benedictus  Levita,  a  deacon  of  Mayence,  whose 
capitularium  of  847  agrees  in  certain  passages  with  the 
decretals1;  Rathod  of  Soissons2;  Otgar,  Archbishop  of 
Mayence  (d.  847),  who  led  the  clerical  rebellion  against 
Louis  the  Pious  3;  Ebo,  Archbishop  of  Rheims,  also  a 
clerical  rebel  against  the  Emperor*;  Riculfus,5  Arch- 
bishop of  Mayence  (784-814);  and  Aldrich.6  The 
authorship,  it  is  apparent,  is  not  established  beyond 
question.  Indeed  there  are  many  reasons  for  believing 
that  these  documents  were  the  product  not  of  a  single 
individual,  but  of  a  joint  effort.  The  constant  repe- 
titions, the  frequent  contradictions,  the  lack  of  unity, 
the  differences  in  style  and  phrases  suggest  this  con- 
clusion. It  is  quite  probable  that  the  leading  church- 
men in  Germany  and  France  in  the  middle  of  the 
ninth  century  shared  the  authorship.7  Gieseler  holds 
that  Riculfus  (784-814)  brought  the  genuine  Isidorian 
collections  from  Spain,  that  Otgar  enlarged  and 
corrupted  them  at  Mayence  (826-847),  that  Benedictus 
Levita  copied  them ;  and  this  may  have  been  the  case. 
They  were  eagerly  received  by  the  Church,  and  for 
various  reasons  Pope  Nicholas  I.  (853-867)  gave 
them  papal  sanction  and  used  them  to  extend  his 
power.  He  led  the  Church  to  believe  that  they  were 
among  the  most  venerable  and  carefully  preserved 
documents  of  the  papal  archives.  Backed  up  by  them, 
he  asserted  his  jurisdiction  over  both  East  and  West; 
in  fact,  the  whole  world.      To  the  eastern  Emperor  he 

»  Blondel,  Kunst,  Walter,  Densiger. 

2  Phillips,  Gfrorer. 

3  Ballareni,  Gieseler,  Wasserschleben. 

*  Weizsacker,  Von  Noorden,  Hinschius,  Richter,  Boxman. 

J  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  48. 

6  Dollinger. 

1  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  49. 


336     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


wrote,  "  We  by  the  power  committed  to  us  by  our  Lord 
through  St.  Peter,  restore  our  brother  Ignatius  to  his 
former  station,  to  his  see  [at  Constantinople],  to  his  dig- 
nity as  patriarch  and  to  all  the  honours  of  his  office."1 
At  the  same  time  he  exalted  the  power  of  excommuni- 
cation and  used  it  to  humble  both  princes  and  prelates ; 
he  forced  Lothair  II.  to  restore  his  divorced  wife;  he 
humbled  the  great  Hincmar  by  reinstating  the  deposed 
Bishop  Rathod  of  Soissons;  he  subjected  both  metro- 
politans and  bishops  to  his  rule;  he  deposed  the 
archbishops  of  Cologne  and  Trier  and  made  the  Pope  ubi- 
quitous through  the  system  of  legates.  Well  could  the 
old  chronicler  say :  "Since  the  days  of  Gregory  I.  to  our 
own  time,  sat  no  high  priest  on  the  throne  of  St.  Peter 
to  be  compared  to  Nicholas.  He  tamed  kings  and 
tyrants,  and  ruled  the  world  like  a  sovereign.  To  holy 
bishops  and  the  clergy  he  was  mild  and  gentle ;  to  the 
wicked  and  unconverted  a  terror,  so  that  we  might  truly 
say  a  new  Elias  arose  in  him." 

It  is  evident  [wrote  the  great  forerunner  of  Hildebrand] 
that  Popes  can  neither  be  bound  nor  unbound  by  any 
earthly  power,  nor  even  by  that  of  the  Apostle  if  he  were 
to  return  upon  earth;  since  Constantine  the  Great  has 
recognised  that  the  pontiffs  held  the  place  of  God  on  earth, 
the  Divinity  not  being  able  to  be  judged  by  any  man  living. 
We  are  then  infallable  and  whatever  may  be  our  acts,  we 
are  not  accountable  for  them  but  to  ourselves.2 

This  is  generally  held  to  be  spurious  now,  but  the 
spirit  of  it  may  be  said  to  be  true.  The  archbishops 
eagerly  accepted  the  decretals  because  they  hoped  to 
profit  by  their  doctrines.  Instead,  however,  through 
them  they  were  subjected  to  the  Pope  and  largely  lost 

«  Schaff,  iv.,    275. 

2  De  Cormenin,  Hist,  of  the  Popes,  248. 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals       337 


their  independence.  They  were  gladly  received  by  the 
bishops,  since  by  them  they  hoped  to  gain  independence 
both  of  the  tyrannical  metropolitans  and  of  the  state. 
They  were  welcomed  by  the  lower  clergy  and  laity  in 
general  without  a  question  because  they  came  from  a 
source  so  high  in  authority  as  the  Pope  and  the  bishops. 
These  forged  decretals  gave  the  Papacy  a  definite 
constitution;  the  Petrine  theory  was  now  proved  by 
indisputable  historical  evidence — the  ideal  Papacy 
was  made  a  &tc£  from  the  very  first.  In  fact  the 
charge  given  by  Peter  to  Clement,  when  the  primate 
Apostle  transmitted  his  power  to  a  successor,  is  found 
in  very  characteristic  language.  The  powers  and 
relations  of  the  whole  dogmatic  hierarchy  from  top  to 
bottom  were  defined.  The  Popes  from  St.  Peter  on 
were  made  the  parents  and  guardians  of  the  faith  of 
the  world,  and  the  legislators  for  it,  and  also  the 
supreme  judges  in  all  cases  of  justice.  In  short  this 
constitution  logically  completed  the  Petrine  theory. 
The  metropolitans  were  curtailed  in  their  prerogatives 
and  subjected  to  the  Pope.  Metropolitan  courts  were 
reduced  to  committees  of  inquiry.  All  original  juris- 
diction in  ecclesiastical  causes  was  transferred  to  Rome. 
No  metropolitan  could  call  a  synod  now  without  the 
Pope's  consent.  The  metropolitans'  power  over  the  bis- 
hops was  greatly  decreased  and  they  were  separated 
from  the  Pope  by  newly  created  primates.  The  bishops, 
in  their  turn,  as  ambassadors  of  God  were  made  indepen- 
dent of  both  the  state  and  the  metropolitans,  but  subjec- 
ted to  the  Pope.  Peter  and  the  other  Apostles  furnished 
the  example  for  this  arrangement.  All  episcopal  cases 
were  taken  out  of  secular  courts1 ;  all  secular  cases  could 

1  Alex.,  Ep.,  i.,  ch.  5;  Felix,  Ep.,  ii.,  ch.  12. 


33%     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


be  carried  to  episcopal  courts  1 ;  all  laymen  as  well  as 
lower  clergy  were  excluded  from  episcopal  synods. 
Bishops  were  made  practically  immune  by  the  great 
difficulty  of  bringing  accusations.  In  the  trial  of  a 
bishop,  the  accuser  had  to  have  seventy-two  duly 
qualified  witnesses  and  if  he  failed  to  prove  his  case 
he  and  not  the  bishop  was  liable  to  punishment.  At 
any  time  the  bishop  could  break  off  proceedings  by 
appealing  the  case  directly  to  the  Pope.  The  priest- 
hood was  definitely  separated  fronr,  the  laity  as  the 
jamiliares  Dei.  They  were  the  spiritales;  the  laity 
the  carnales.2  Priests  were  also  freed  from  secular 
control  and  placed  above  it.  They,  in  like  manner, 
enjoyed  certain  immunities  which  made  it  no  easy 
matter  to  proceed  against  them. 

At  the  same  time,  the  relations  of  Church  and  state 
were  denned  more  clearly.  Ecclesiastical  power  was 
now  held  to  be  supreme  over  secular  power  and  that 
change  was  a  pronounced  revolution.  "All  the  rulers 
of  earth,"  it  was  dogmatically  affirmed,  "are  bound 
to  obey  the  bishop  and  to  bow  the  neck  before  him."3 
Imperial  control  of  the  Church,  exercised  for  eight 
centuries,  was  declared  to  be  a  usurpation  which 
entailed  disputes  and  wars.  The  state  was  represented 
as  unholy,  the  Church  as  holy.  That  proposition 
struck  the  sword  of  justice  out  of  the  hand  of  the 
temporal  prince  and  removed  the  clergy  from  the 
reach  of  the  secular  law.  Clergy  were  freed  from 
political  courts  and  the  laymen  were  excluded,  in 
theory  at  least,  from  participation  in  Church  legislation. 
In  short  these  decretals  carried  the  papal  theocracy 

1  Anacletus,  Ep.,  i.,  ch.  4;  Marcellinus,  Ep.  ii.,  ch.  3. 

2  Kurtz  §86,  ii.,  No.  2. 

3  Clement,  Ep.,  1. 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals       339 


t 


far  beyond  any  claims  made  up  to  that  time  by  the 
Popes  themselves.  It  was  left  to  Gregory  VII.  and 
Innocent  III.  to  make  the  claim  a  living  reality.^       __„ 

These  decretals  formed  a  part  of  the  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici  for  six  hundred  years  and  supplied  a  complete 
set  of  laws  concerning  Church  lands,  usurpation  and 
spoliation,  ordinations,  sacraments,  fasts,  festivals, 
relics  of  the  cross  and  of  the  Apostles,  schism  and 
heresy,  the  use  of  holy  water  and  the  chrism,  the 
consecration  of  churches,  the  blessing  of  the  fruits  of 
the  field,  sacred  vessels,  garments,  etc.  In  this  way 
society  was  influenced  and  modified  in  all  its  ramifi- 
cations. Both  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  polity  of 
Europe  was  affected  for  centuries  to  follow.  Over 
and  over  again  they  were  quoted  to  prove  papal  om- 
nipotence against  temporal  authority.  For  the  purpose 
of  illustration,  the  decretals  were  replete  with  personal 
incidents  and  had  in  them  many  beautiful  axioms  of 
sincere  and  vital  religious  truth.  The  whole  tone  of 
the  composition  was  pious  and  reverential.  Pope, 
bishop,  and  lower  clergy  all  gained  by  this  shrewd  and 
specious  defence  of  the  Papacy.  The  priesthood  act-  1 
ually  constituted  the  Church.  _- ^-"7 

In  this  period  of  ignorance  and  lawlessness,  while  the 
Empire  established  by  Charles  the  Great  was  disinte- 
grating, the  Papacy  rapidly  forged  to  the  front  as  the 
champion  of  united  Christendom ;  and  to  this  end  the 
Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals  contributed  powerfully. 
How  much  was  contributed  that  was  actually  new  may 
be  a  question.  Whether  the  history  of  the  Church 
would  have  been  the  same  had  they  not  appeared  is 
a  disputed  point.  Whether  the  Pope  without  them 
could  have  become  the  greatest  ruler  of  western  Eu- 
rope by  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  is  not  clear. 


4o     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Whether  the  Papacy  would  have  had  a  world-wide  po- 
litical interest  from  this  time  on  without  them  is  a 
question  still  unsettled. 

Nothing  better  illustrates  the  immediate  fruits  of 
the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals  than  the  pontificate 
of  Nicholas  I.  In  the  year  858  he  was  unanimously 
chosen  Pope  by  the  Emperor,  and  the  clergy  and  people 
of  Rome.  He  had  been  the  friend  and  minister  of 
Sergius  II.  and  Leo  IV.  amid  all  their  dangers  and 
difficulties.  His  trying  experiences  qualified  him  for 
the  responsible  office.  His  personal  qualities  had  won 
him  many  friends.  Consequently  there  was  general 
rejoicing  when,  in  the  presence  of  the  Emperor  and 
the  Romans,  he  was  inaugurated.  Three  days  after 
the  solemnity,  the  Emperor  Louis  II.  entertained  Pope 
Nicholas  I.  at  a  state-banquet  and  then  withdrew  a 
short  distance  from  the  city  walls  to  receive  the  return- 
visit  on  the  following  day.  As  the  Pope,  escorted  by  the 
clergy  and  nobility,  approached  the  imperial  camp, 
Louis  met  him,  dismounted  from  his  horse,  and  con- 
ducted the  Pope's  palfrey  the  length  of  a  bow-shot, 
after  the  ordinary  custom  of  a  bridle-groom.  A 
sumptous  feast  was  then  served  in  the  imperial  tents, 
and  the  Emperor  again  escorted  Nicholas  a  like  dis- 
tance on  his  return.  The  Pontiff,  on  parting,  descended 
from  his  horse,  embraced  Louis,  and  kissed  him.  "And 
thus,"  says  the  chronicler,  "they  lovingly  took  leave 
of  each  other." 

This  imperial  self-humiliation  had  beneath  it  a 
purpose.  Louis  II.  hoped  to  extend  his  dominion 
beyond  the  borders  of  Italy,  to  which  his  brothers 
had  reduced  him,  and  desired  the  assistance  of  Rome. 
Nicholas  I.  was  not  averse  to  meddling  in  worldly 
affairs.     Backed  up  by  the  false  decretals,  with  pre- 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals       341 


cedents  created  by  his  sainted  predecessors,  with 
political  confusion  and  secular  wrangling  as  his  ally, 
with  his  own  boldness  and  clear  intellect  as  his  guides, 
he  plunged  into  mundane  affairs  without  hesitation. 
Ability  and  opportunity  won  for  him  one  success  after 
another.  The  first  conquest  he  made  was  in  humiliating 
the  Italian  primates  of  Milan,  Aquileia,  and  Ravenna, 
and  in  making  the  Italian  clergy  directly  dependent 
upon  Rome.  Emperor  Louis  II.  was  forced  to  bow 
to  papal  authority  in  this  matter,  although  hitherto 
the  creation  of  new  bishoprics  had  rested  with  the 
temporal  lord. 

Again  when  the  bishopric  of  Hamburg  was  destroyed 
by  the  Normans,  King  Louis  of  Germany  translated 
the  dispossessed  Bishop  Anschar  to  Bremen.  Now 
the  Archbishop  of  Cologne  claimed  jurisdiction  over 
Bremen  and  declared  that  the  temporal  power  could 
not  dismember  an  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction.  Both 
parties  agreed  to  refer  the  case  to  Rome.  Nicholas  I. 
confirmed  the  separation  and  ratified  the  transference 
of  Anschar.  Charles  the  Great  would  have  settled  the 
case  himself.  Another  victory  was  thus  won  in  the 
name  of  Pseudo-Isidore.  The  policy  of  breaking  down 
all  interposition  between  the  successor  of  Peter  and  the 
episcopacy  had  been  clearly  set  forth. 

A  test  of  this  principle  came  in  the  case  of  Hincmar, 
the  able  and  powerful  Archbishop  of  Rheims.  In  861 
he  summarily  suspended  Rathod,  Bishop  of  Soissons, 
for  disobeying  the  sentence  of  a  provincial  synod  in 
reinstating  a  priest  whom  he  had  unjustly  expelled. 
Rathod  at  once  appealed  to  the  Pope  and  asked  per- 
mission of  Hincmar  to  go  to  Rome  to  present  his  suit. 
Hincmar  refused  the  request  and  called  Rathod  before 
a  second  synod  for  contempt,  when  he  was  degraded 


342     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


from  his  office  and  imprisoned  in  a  monastery.  Once 
more  Rathod  made  a  touching  appeal  to  Nicholas  I.1 
who  forthwith  rebuked  Hincmar  and  ordered  him  to 
restore  Rathod  to  his  see,  and  to  send  him  to  Rome. 
King  Charles  the  Bald  was  ordered,  "by  his  love  to  God 
and  his  duty  to  the  Holy  See,"  to  see  that  the  order 
was  enforced.  Bo±h~ -Hincmar  and  Charles  refused, 
and  Rathod  remained  a  prisoner  for  two  years.  Papal 
power  was  on  trial,  but  Nicholas  I.  was  equal  to  the 
situation.  At  last  Charles  was  persuaded  to  intervene. 
Rathod  was  released  and  sent  to  Rome,  but  was  not 
reinstated  in  his  bishopric.  The  Pope  reinstated  him 
to  office.  To  prove  his  authority  he  quoted  the  Pseudo- 
Isidorian  Decretals,  which  the  Frankish  clergy  had 
framed  to  insure  their  own  independence. 2  Hincmar 
remonstrated, but  in  the  end  was  forced  to  apologise  and 
obey .  ' ' Thus, "  complained  Hincmar, ' '  was  a  criminal, 
solemnly  deposed  by  the  unanimous  judgment  of  five 
ecclesiastical  provinces  of  this  realm,  reinstated  by 
the  Pope,  not  by  ordinary  canonical  rule,  but  by  an 
arbitrary  act  of  power,  in  a  summary  way,  without  in- 
quiry, and  against  the  consent  of  his  natural  judges." 
Metropolitan  independence  was  crushed,  the  royal 
power  was  forced  to  obey  by  the  awful  threat  of  ex- 
communication, and  papal  supremacy  was  triumphant. 
Truly  a  new  epoch  had  appeared  in  the  rise  of  the 
mediaeval  Church,  when  the  Pope  could  proudly  de- 
clare that  "the  privileges  of  the  Holy  See  are  the 
panoply  of  the  Church  and  title-deeds  of  him  who  is 
the  supreme  lord  of  the  priesthood  for  the  government 
of  all  in  authority  under  him  and  for  the  comfort  of 
every  one  that  shall  suffer  wrong  or  injury  from  sub- 

i  Bar  on  jus,  Ann.,  863. 

*  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  bk.  vii.,  ch.  2. 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals      343 


ordinate  powers"  » ;  that  "the  action  of  synods,  general 
or  provincial,  might  be  peremptorily  arrested  by  a 
simple  appeal  to  Rome  ...  at  any  stage  of  the  pro- 
ceeding" ;  that  every  bishop  must  give  lawful  obedience 
to  the  "  King  of  Bishops"  ;  and  that  "any  one,  without 
exception  of  person,  who  shall  disobey  the  doctrine, 
mandates,  interdicts,  or  decretals,  published  by  the 
Apostolic  Bishop  on  behalf  of  the  Catholic  faith,  the 
discipline  of  the  Church,  the  correction  of  the  faithful, 
the  reformation  of  evil-doers,  and  the  discouragement 
of  vice,  let  him  be  accursed." 2 

In  dealing  with  the  schismatic,  heretical  Eastern 
Church,  however,  all  careful  reserve  vanished  and 
without  fear  or  caution  the  Roman  Pontiffs  assert  their 
prerogatives  in  a  clear,  decisive,  and  peremptory  tone. 
In  the  Photian  schism  at  Constantinople,  Nicholas  I. 
assumed  the  right  to  decide  which  of  the  two  claimants 
to  the  patriarchate  was  legitimate.  To  Photius,  who 
had  secured  the  office  by  imperial  aid,  the  Roman 
pontiff  wrote  a  letter  which  up  to  that  time  was  unsur- 
passed for  supreme  papal  arrogance: 

Our  Lord  and  Saviour  .  .  .  established  the  foundations 
of  his  church  upon  the  Rock  Peter.  .  .  .  Now  upon  this 
foundation  the  appointed  builders  have  from  time  to 
time  heaped  many  precious  stones,  till  by  this  unwearied 
diligence  the  whole  building  has  been  perfected  into  in- 
dissoluble solidity.  .  .  .  Since  this  church  of  Peter  is  the 
head  of  all  churches,  it  is  imperative  upon  all  to  adopt 
her  as  their  model  in  every  matter  of  ecclesiastical  ex- 
pediency and  institution.  .  .  .  From  her  all  synods  and  all 
councils  derive  their  power  to  bind  and  to  loose.3 

1  Bouquet,  vii.,  391. 

*  Pertz,  i.,  462. 

*  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  bk.  vii.,  ch.  6. 


344    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  pontificate  of  Nicholas  I.,  who  died  in  867, 
marks  the  acme  of  papal  power  during  this  period.  The 
history  of  the  Western  Church, controlled  by  Rome,  dur- 
ing the  latter  part  of  the  ninth  and  the  tenth  century, 
covers  a  period  of  unparalleled  corruption  and  debility 
— "a  death-sleep  of  moral  and  spiritual  exhaustion." 
The  Papacy  as  a  constructive  spiritual  force  almost 
disappears  from  view.  The  lofty  ideas  of  Leo  I., 
Gregory  I.,  and  Nicholas  I. — their  magnificent  am- 
bitions for  the  Church,  their  imperial  rule,  and  their 
commanding,  aggressive  spirit — all  disappeared.  The 
causes  may  be  found  in  weak,  wicked,  worldly  Popes,  in 
anarchy  and  political  confusion  in  Italy,  and  in  feudal- 
ism. X  The  Church  was  reaping  the  reward  of  a  close 
alliance  with  the  state.     All  the  gains  made  by  the 

I  Church  during  this  epoch  were  of  a  secular  character. 
The  moral  and  spiritual  powers  of  Latin  Christianity 
lay  dormant  beneath  a  mass  of  corruption,  self-seeking, 
and  worldly  passions  which  covered  them  and  nearly 
extinguished  them.  The  marvellous  vitality  of  the 
organisation  of  the  Church  alone  saved  her  from 
disintegration  in  that  period  of  decentralisation.  The 
spirit  of  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals,  from  this 
standpoint ,  had  become  the  saviour  of  the  Church .  The 
next  force  that  appeared  in  western  Europe  to  rescue 
the  Church  from  the  low  state  of  spiritual  degeneration 
to  which  she  had  fallen  was,  strange  to  say,  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire  under  the  guidance  of  another  mighty 

I    German  ruler. 

\  Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — Roberts  and  Donaldson,  Ante-Nicene  Christ- 
ian Library,  ix.,  pt.  2,  p.  144/.  Has  letters 
of  six  Popes. 


The  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals       345 


2. — Schaff,  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  viii.,  60 1. 

3. — Henderson,  Select  Historical  Documents  of  the  I* 

Middle  Ages,   319.     Contains  the  Donation 

of  Constantine. 

Bibliographical  Note: — There  is  no  complete 
collection  of  these  False  Letters  in  English. 
Migne,  Patrologiaz,  cxxx.,  contains  the  first 
complete  collection.  The  famous  letters  of 
Pope  Nicholas  I.  are  in  vol.  cxix.  The  latest 
and  best  collection  is  by  Hinschius,  Leip., 
1863. 

B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Dollinger,  J.  J.  I.,  Fables  Respecting  the  Popes 
in  the  Middle  Ages.     N.  Y.,  1872. 
— Greenwood,  T.,  Cathedra  Petri.    Lond.,  1859.  ^-" 

Bk.  vii.,  viii. 
— Janus  (Dollinger) ,  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  J"~ 

1869. 
— Lea,    H.    C,    Studies    in    Church    History. 

Phil.,  1883.     Pp.  43-102. 
— Lee,  G.  C,  Hincmar.     Bait.,  1897.     Am.Soc. 

of  Ch.  Hist.,  viii. 
— Newman,  J.  H.,  Essays,  Critical  and  Histor- 
ical.    Lond.,  1888.     II.,  271-5;   320-35. 
7. — Oman,  C,  The  Dark  Ages.     Lond.,  1893. 
— Prichard,  J.  C,  Life  and  Times  of  Hincmar. 
Lond.,  1849. 

Bibliographical  Note: — The  best  special  discus- 
sions are  not  in  English.  Among  them  are, 
Blondel,  Pseudo-Isidorus  et  Turrianus  Va- 
pulantes.  Geneva,  1628;  Theiner,  De  Pseu- 
doisidor.  canonum  collectione.  Bres.,  1826; 
Kunst,  De  Fontibus  et  Consilio  Pseud,  collect. 
Gott.,  1832;  Wasserschleben,  Beitrdge  zur 
Geschichte  der  falschen  Dekretalen.  Bres.,  1844 ; 
Weizsacker,  Hinkmar  und  Pseudoisidor,  1858; 
Schrors,  Hincmar  Erzbischof  von  Rheims,  sein 
Leben  und  sein  Schriften.  Frieb.,  1884; 
Phillips,  Kirchenrecht.     Reg.,  1845. 


346     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


ii. — general: 

Adams,  234.  Allen,  50.  Alzog,  ii.,  194-211. 
Butler,  ch.  61-62.  Coxe,  lect.  5,  sec.  4-6.  Creigh- 
ton,  i.,  12.  Crooks,  331.  Darras,  iii.,  18.  Dol- 
linger,  iii.,  ch.  4,  sec.  7.  Emerton,  76.  Fisher,  24, 
169.  Fitzgerald,  ii.,  28-54.  Foulkes,  ch.  7.  Gie- 
•  seler,  ii.,  324.  Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  37.  Greenwood, 
iii.,ch.  6,  7.  Hase,  184.  Hurst,  i.,  494.  Jennings, 
i.,  ch.  8.  Kurtz,  i.,  511.  Milman,  iii.,  58,  190. 
Milner,  ii.,  190.  Moeller,  ii.,  160-164.  Mosheim, 
i.,  187,  414,  420.  Neander,  vi.,  10 1,  110,  117,  122,^ 
138.  Robertson,  bk.  4,  ch.  1.  Schaff,  iv.,  266-273. 
Sheldon,  ii.,  122. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

ORGANISATION,    LIFE,    AND    INSTITUTIONS    OF   THE 
CHURCH,    SIXTH   TO   NINTH    CENTURY 

Outline:  I. — Organisation  of  the  papal  hierarchy.  II. — Moral 
condition  of  the  clergy  and  laity.  III. — Great  activity  and  wide 
influence  of  the  Church.  IV. — The  ordeals  and  the  Church.  V. — 
Church  discipline — excommunication  and  interdict — and  penance. 
VI. — Worship — the  mass — preaching — hymns.  VII. — The  sacra- 
ments.    VIII. — Relics  and  saints.     IX. — Sources. 

THE  Roman  Catholic  Church,  based  on  the  Bible 
and  tradition,  satisfying  the  religious  needs  of 
the  age,  and  moulded  by  the  historical  forces  of  the 
period,  changed  from  the  democratic,  apostolic  Church 
to  the  powerful  monarchial  hierarchy  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  by  a  natural,  historical  process.  The  Pope,  the 
Bishop  of  Bishops,  stood  at  the  head  of  the  well  organ- 
ised hierarchy  as  the  source  of  faith,  the  supreme  law-^ 
Tgiver.  the  distributor  of  justice,  the  resort  of  last 
appeal,  and  the  grantor  of  offices.  honourT  and  favours. 
He  came  to  hold  the  balance  of  power  in  the  world- 
politics  and  claimed  supremacy  in  secular  affairs.  To 
enforce  his  will  he  had  an  army  of  priests  and  monks, 
the  sanctity  and  prestige  of  Peter's  Chair,  and  the  for- 
midable weapons  of  excommunication  and  interdict. 
To  assist  him  in  his  multitudinous  duties,  an  extensive 
papal  court  had  been  gradually  built  up. 

Just  below  the  Pope  in  the  hierarchy  came  the  arch- 

347 


348     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


bishops,  or  primates,  or  Tnet.ropn1it.anc;  1  After  the 
third  century,  the  term  metropolitan  in  the  East  meant 
the  bishop  who  lived  in  the  capital  of  a  province.  The 
Council  of  Nicasa  recognised  the  office  and  gave  the 
metropolitan  the  right  to  ordain  bishops. 2  The  Council 
of  Antioch  clearly  defined  the  i'urisdictinr|  of  f.fie_ 
.metropolitan. 3  He  ruled  the  suffragan  bishops,  con- 
ducted episcopal  elections,  confirmed  and  ordained 
bishops,  called  and  presided  over  annual  episcopal 
synods.  Somewha,Llater  he  came  to  exercise  the  right 
of  deciding  appeals.4  Gradually  the  name  and  pre- 
rogatives were  extended  to  the  West,  where  about  the 
seventh  century  the  metropolitans  were  very  powerful,  s 
but  bv  degrees  they  lost  their  power  when  secular 
princes,  like  the  Merovingian  kings,  usurped  their  func- 
tions. Even  the  bishops  adopted  the  short-sighted 
policy  of  preferring  to  have  their  superior  at  Rome  in- 
stead of  in  their  own  province.  Under  the  Carolingians, 
especially  Charles  the  Great,  and  the  Pseudo-Isidorian 
Decretals,  however,  they  regained  something  of  their 
earlier  prestige.  But  they  were  subjected  to  the  direct 
control  of  the  Pope  and  existed  as  useful  intermediaries 
between  Rome  and  the  ordinary  bishops.  In  that 
limited  sphere  of  activity,  however,  there  were  still 
many  important  duties  left  to  the  metropolitan  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  As  early  as  the  sixth  century  the  Pope 
at  Rome,  as  patriarch,  claimed  the  right  to  sanction 


>  Hatch,  Growth  of  Church  Institutions,  Lond.,  1887,  121;  Smith 
and  Cheetham,  art.  on  "Metropolitan." 

2  Canon  VI.     See  IV.     See  also  Canon  XIX  of  Council  of  An- 
tioch. 

3  Canon  IX. 

*  Cod.  Justin,  i.,  4,  29. 

5  Guizot,  Hist,  of  Civ.  in  Fr.,  ii..  46.  • 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    349 


the  election  of  a  metropolitan  by  the  clergy  of  the 
province,  and  bestowed  the  "pallium"  upon  the  candi- 
date. The  metropolitans,  it  must  be  remembered, 
were  not  generally  separated  from  archbishops  in  thF 
early  history  of  the  Church.  When  the  differentiation 
did  evolve,  the  archbishop  became  superior  to  the_ 
metropolitan. 

The  title  archbishop  was  unknown  in  the  Church  be- 
fore the  fourth  century ._  At  first  it  was  used  as  a  sign 
of  honour  without  implying  superior  jurisdiction  over 
bishops.  Perhaps  Athanasius  first  used  it  in  speak- 
ing of  Bishop  Alexander  of  Alexandria.  Then  Gregory 
Nazianzen  applied  it  to  Athanasius  himself.  Soon  it 
came  to  be  used  in  connection  with  the  bishops  of  the 
most  important  sees  in  the  East.  Liberatus  gave  all 
the  patriarchs  the  title  of  archbishops.  The  Council 
of  Chalcedon  even  applied  the  name  to  the  mighty 
patriarchs  of  Rome  and  Constantinople.  When  the 
Empire  was  divided  into  dioceses,  which  in  turn  were 
subdivided  into  provinces,  an  exarch  or  vicar  was 
placed  in  the  capital  of  each  diocese.  In  conscious 
imitation,  the  Church  established  ecclesiastical  exarchs . 
or  patriarchs  in  these  local  capitals,  ftrchbishop  was  a 
common  title  for  this  office.  The" archbishop  ordained' 
the  metropolitans,  convened  diocesan  synods,  received 
appeals  from  the  metropolitan  and  his  provincial 
synod,  and  enforced  discipline  in  his  diocese.  In 
the  West  in  the  seventh  century  Isidore  of  Seville 
ranked  the  archbishop  higher  than  the  metropolitan. 
The  precise  distinction  between  the  two  offices,  how- 
ever, was  not  very  clear  and,  finally,  was  lost  entirely. 
These  officers  usually  sided  with  the  secular  authorities 
against  the  Pope  and  tended  to  favour  the  organisation 
of  national  Churches  with  patriarchs  at  their  head. 


35°    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


They  attempted  likewise  to  subject  the  bishops  and 
priests  to  their  rule  and  thus  curtail  the  power  of  the 
Pope.  The  Popes,  however,  saw  the  danger  and 
sought  to  avert  it  by  appointing  several  archbishops 
in  each  country,  and  bestowing  upon  one  of  them 
the  title  of  "primate"  with  the  delegated  powers  of 
the  Holy  See.  Thus  England  had  the  archbishops  of  _ 
Canterbury,  the  oldest  (seventh  century)  and  most 
important,1  and  of  York  (eighth  century) .  Germany 
was  ruled  by  the  archbishops  of  Mayence,  who  was 
"primus"  and  who  served  as  imperial  chancellor  until 
the  time  of  Otto  the  Great,2  Trier  (eighth  century), 
Cologne  (eighth  century),  Salzburg  (eighth  century), 
Hamburg-Bremen  (ninth  century),  and  Magdeburg 
(tenth  century) . 3  France  possessed  the  archbishops  of 
Rheims,  who  was  recognised  as  primate,4  Aix,  Aux, 
Bordeaux,  Bourges ,  and  Rouen.  In  Italy  the  Pope  had 
a  continual  struggle  with  the  archbishops  of  Milan, 
who  claimed  as  their  founder  the  apostle  Barnabas, 
Aquileia,  and  Ravenna.  The  use  of  the  title  primate 
does  not  come  into  ordinary  use,  it  seems,  until  after 
the  appearance  of  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals. 

Nejj;   rp    the   hierarchy    came   the    bishops      They  > 
resented,  as  a  general  rule,  the  pretensions,  of  hotb.tr.e 
metropolitans  and  the  archbishops  p-nd  recognised  t.he_ 
PQpe  as  their  friend  and  si.iperior-     Since  all  western 
Europe  was  divided  up  into  episcopal  dioceses,  with 
one   bishop    in   each    diocese,    they    were    both    very 

'  See  article  on  Theodore  Torens  in  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biog. 

2  Boniface  (d.  735)  was  the  greatest. 

3  Hauck,  Kircheng.  Deutschl.,  ii. 

*  This  office  was  held  by  Hincmar  (d.  882V  the  gfrpat.pst  man  nf. 
his  time.       Prichard,  Life  and  Times  of  Hincmar,  1849;  Noorden, 
"Hincmar,  Erzbischof  von  Rheims,  1863. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    351 


numerous   and   very    powerful,    particularly    in   local 
affairs. 

For,  the  first  five  centurieg  of  the  Christian-era^  the 
election  of  bishops  in  the  Church  followed  one  general 
pattern.     The  neighbouring  bishops  nominated  while  ^ 
the  local  clergy  and  laity  approved  the  election  anfl 
^rawwi^jyq^kitfi  t.pstirnony  of  character.     But  with 
the  evolution  in  the  organisation  of  the  Church,  and  as 
a  result  of  the  close  alliance  with  the  state,  a  series  of 
important  changes   occurred.     (1)  With    the   rise   of 
the  metropolitans  there  appeared  a  new  factor  in  the 
selection  of  a  bishop.     The  metropolitan  usually  con- 
ducted  the  election,  and  confirmed  and  ordained  the 
candidate.     This   came   to   be   regulated   by    Church 
canons.  "  (2)  With  the  ascendancy  of  the  state  over  the 
Church  the  selection  of  bishops  was  practically  trans- 
ferred to  the  laity.     At  times  Emperors  alone  nomi- 
nated.    After  the  sixth  century,  the  right  of  royal 
assent  was  generally  acknowledged.     It  was  but  a  short 
step  to  convert  that  secular  assumption  into  a  right 
of  nomination.     Thus  the  ruling  power  had  come  to 
control  the  election  of  bishops  quite  generally  through- 
out the  mediaeval  Church.     Among  the  chief  qualifica- 
tions for  the  office  were,  in  addition  to  a  good  cnaractef, 
an  age  limit  of  fifty  years,  ordination  as  priest,  or  at 
least  as  deacon,  and  membership  in  the  local  clergyT 
But  these  requirements  were  often  broken  and  waived". 
The  bishop  occupied  an  office  of  arduous  duties  and 
grave  responsibilities.     It  might  be  said  that  he  was 
the  powerful  ruler  of  his  province.     He  administered 
all  the  Christian  sacraments.     He  enforced  discipline. 
He  received  all  income  and  offerings,  and  managed  all 
the  ecclesiastical  business  of  his  diocese.     He  exercised 
the  power  of   ordination  and  confirmation,  and  thus 


352     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


perpetuated  the  Christian  ministry.  He  did  all 
the  formal  preaching  and  by  visitation  kept  an  over- 
sight of  the  whole  Church  under  his  care.  He  was 
the  natural  medium  of  communication  to  and  from 
his  people  and  clergy.  He  was  also  an  important 
factor  in  the  local  synod  and  served  as  the  ecclesiastical 
judge  of  his  district.  All  such  matters  as  liturgy,  wor- 
ship, alms,  dedication  of  churches,  patronage,  and 
protection  of  minors,  widows,  and  the  unfortunate 
came  under  his  jurisdiction.  Nor  did  his  cares  end 
here.  Through  the  synod  he  helped  to  rule  the  pro- 
vince and  through  the  general  council  he  participated 
in  the  government  of  the  Church  at  large. 

The  bishops  controlled  the  priests,  who  were  found  in 
every  section  of  Christendom  in  tne  sixrh  celiLui'y,  and 
who£an^Jntovital  touch  with  the  masses  ot  the  laity. 
As  early  as  the  third  century,  indeed,  all  churches  began 
to  conform  to  a  single  type.  The  independence  of  the 
presbyter  of  the  early  Church  disappeared  with  the  rise 
of  the  episcopal  system.  The  subordination  of  the 
priest  became,  by  the  sixth  century,  complete.  This 
result  was  inevitable  because  of  the  rise  of  the  synodal 
system,  the  assimilation  of  the  organisation  of  the  Em- 
pire, and  the  development  of  the  parochial  system, 
which  subdivided  the  diocese  into  smaller  sections  in 
the  hands  of  priests.1  The  priests  administered  the 
sacraments  to  the  people  to  whom  they  were  the  very 
bread  of  life  and  the  means  of  salvation,  heard  them  in 

I  their  confessions, inflicted  penances  and  gave  them  coun- 
sel, baptised  their  children,  confirmed  them,  watched 

'  over  all  their  deeds  on  earth,  closed  their  eyes  in  death, 

i  Hatch,  Growth  of  Church  Institutions,  contends  that  the  parish 
was  of  German  origin,  and  not  Roman. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    353 

and  prepared  them  for  the  world  to  come,  and  even 
through  prayers  and  masses  interceded  for  their  for- 
giveness in  purgatory.  Working  side  by  side  with  the 
priests  were  the  countless  monks  and  nuns  fairly 
swarming  over  western  Europe,  who  also  came  into  in- 
timate touch  with  the  masses.  They  were  the  teachers 
and  preachers  of  the  common  people.  In  the  hands 
of  these  priests  and  monks  rested  almost  entirely  the 
humane  and  charitable  institutions  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
The  true  religion  of  Jesus  was  likewise  in  their  hands 
rather  than  in  the  hands  of  the  higher  clergy. 

At  the  bottom  of  the  hierarchical  pyramid  were  the 
laity,  whobyjhe  twelfth  century  inrlnfoH  ^1  +h*  p^npl^ 
of  western  Europe,  except  a  portion  of  Spain.  Both 
canon  law  and  imperial  law  forbade  their  performing 
any  sacerdotal  functions  and  ordered  them  "to  be  obe- 
dient to  the  order  handed  down  by  the  Lord." 

From  the  standpoint  of  morality,1  this  period  was 
one  of  pronounced  contrasts.  Christian  virtues  and 
heathen  vices,  the  strictest  asceticism  and  the  grossest 
sensuality,  tyranny  and  crude  democracy,  all  existed 
side  by  side  with  apparently  no  serious  conflicts.  It  was 
an  age  of  anarchy,  confusion,  lawlessness,  immorality ,_ 
"and  highway  robbery  on  land  and_sea,  accompanied 
fcy_  boldness,  7:h7va1ry,  and  heroism.  _In  the  East,  the 
Church  had  to  contend  with  "the  vices  of  an  effete 
civilisation  and  a  corrupt  court."  In  the  West,  many 
of  the  old  Roman  vices  were  continued  and  even 
invigorated  by  fresh  barbaric  blood.  It  would  be 
difficult  to  imagine  anything  more  corrupt  than  the 
Merovingian  court.2    Of   the  whole    period  Gibbon 

»  Acta  Sanctorum;  Greg,  of  Tours,  Hist,  of  France;  Mon.  Ger.; 
Mansi;  Harduin;  Hefele,  iii.,  iv.;  Lecky;  Guizot;  Balmes. 
2  Greg,  of  Tours;  Milman;  Lecky;  Hallam;  Gibbon. 


354     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


declares  that  it  would  be  impossible  "to  find  anywhere 
more  vice  or  less  virtue." 

The  people  at  this  time  might  be  called  more  religious -., 
than  moral.  A  little  piety  would  cover  a  multitude 
of  sins  in  the  eyes  of  even  the  best.  A  whole  life  of 
wickedness  and  evil-doing  was  all  wiped  out  and  a  home 
in  heaven  assured  by  the  building  of  a  church,  monas- 
tery, shrine,  or  hospital,  or  by  deeding  property  to- 
the  Church,  or  by  doing  some  pious  deed.     An  ex- 

Qprprpratprl    hp.lifif    in    the,    suppfnpt^ral    n*^    mjraCul0US_ 

was  universal.  A  physical  hell,  heaven,  devil,  and 
angels  were  just  as  real  to  the  people  as  the  earth,  day 
and  night,  the  sun  and  moon,  and  the  seasons.  The 
worship  of  saints  and  relics  was  very  common,  and 
particularly  in  favour  with  the  most  wicked.  The 
seventh  century  had  more  saints  than  any  preceding, 
except  possibly  the  fourth.  Under  these  circumstances, 
it  was  not  uncommon  to  find  good  used  as  a  cloak  for 
evil  and  the  greatest  apparent  sanctity  united  with  the 
worst  licentiousness.1 

The  clergy  led  society  and  set  moral  standards  which 
the  masses  followed  without  question.  They  embraced 
^LiTsocial  ranks  from  the  sons  of  kings  to  the  sons  of 
slaves.  Politically  they  shared  with  the  kings  and 
nobles  the  rule  of  the  people.  The  upper  clergy  had 
huge  estates  like  the  landed  nobles,  and  were,  in  fact, 
recruited  largely  from  the  younger  sons  of  noble- 
men. The  clergy  were  everywhere  immune  from  taxa- 
tion and  military  service.  Charles  the  Great  and  his 
"successors  gave  them  all  the  privileges  granted  by  the 
Eastern  Emperors  from  Constantine  on.  They  could 
not  be  tried  or  sued  before  civil  courts,  but  had  their 

«  Butler,  Lives  of  Saints;  Lecky. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    355 


own  tribunals.  They  were  supported  by  the  income 
from  landed  estates,  gifts  from  the  pious,  and  legally 
established  tithes.  Morally,  they  were  as  a  rule 
superior  to  their  flocks,  although  there  are  many 
disgraceful  exceptions.  Europe  was  cursed  at  this 
time  with  tramp  priests  without  churches  who  swarmed 
over  Europe  demanding  a  livelihood  because  of  the 
sanctity  of  their  office.  Contrary  to  law,  bishops 
wore  swords  and  lost  their  lives  on  battle-fields' — even 


Popes  engaged  in  warfare. 1  Drunkenness  was  not 
infrequent  among  the  clergy  and  licentiousness  was  a 
common  complaint  against  them.2  The  minutes  of 
Church  synods  are  full  of  censures  and  punishments 
for  clerical  sins  and  vices  like  fornication,  intemperance, 
avarice, hunting  and  hawking,  gambling,  betting,  attend- 
ing horse  races,  going  to  theatres,  keeping  houses  of 
prostitution,  and  others.3  Celibacy  was  the  prescribed 
rule  of  the  West,  but  many  of  the  clergy  were  either 

married  or  lived  with   mistresses.     Hadrian  II.  was 

1  j_      ~-  _ 

married  before  he  became  Pope  and  his  son-in-law 
murdered  both  the  Pope's  wife  and  daughter  (868). 4 
But  there  were  of  course  many  noteworthy  examples~of 
purity  in  all  ranks  of  the  clergy.  Married  laymen 
upon  entering  the  priesthood  or  a  convent  gave  up 
their  wives.  The  lowest  depths,  perhaps,  were  reached  "^ 
in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries,  when  even  the 
Popes  themselves,  who  should  have  stood  for  all  that 
was  best,  set  the  example  for  the  greatest  evil.  Reform 
did  not  appear  until  the  coming  of  the  monastic  order 
of  Clugny,  the  German  Emperors,  and  the  Hilde- 
brandine  Popes. 


1  Schaff,  iv.,  331.  t  Greg,  of  Tours. 

3  Hefele,  iii.,  341.  *  Ibid.,  iv.,  323. 


356      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  Church,  however,  during  this  trying  formative 
period  was  the  moral  ark  of  safety  for  Europe^  It  fought 
vice  and  encouraged  virtue!  It  was  the  only  promoter 
of  education  and  culture.  It  taught  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the  Ten  Commandments, 
and  along  with  them  were  learned  lessons  of  faith  and 
duty.  It  emphasised  both  the  need  and  importance  of 
prayer,  fasts,  charity,  pity,  hospitality,  and  other 
virtues.  Its  ideals  were  always  high — far  above  the 
masses  of  the  Church  members — though  in  practice 
the  clergy  did  not  always  conform  to  the  ideals.  The 
Church  was  the  one  great  light  that  pointed  the  people 
of  this  epoch  to  a  brighter  day  and  a  better  civilisation. 
The  sanctity  of  the  home  life  for  the  laity  and  of 
celibacy  for  the  priests  was  asserted.  Divorce  was 
seldom  permitted.1  Woman's  position  and  property 
rights  were  advanced.  The  Virgin  Mary  was  con- 
stantly extolled  as  the  incarnation  of  womanly  purity, 
love,  and  devotion.  Much  wise  and  ennobling  legis- 
lation on  the  subject  of  marriage  was  enacted.  There 
are  many  instances,  too,  where  the  head  of  the  Church, 
or  one  of  his  officers,  bravely  protected  injured  inno- 
cence, even  against  kings.  Polygamy,  concubinage, 
secret  marriage,  the  marriage  of  relatives,  and  mar- 
riage with  Jews,  heathen,  or  heretics  were  forbidden. 2 

The  Church  inherited  the  patristic  conception  of 
Rome  in  regard  to  slavery.  Jesus  had  made  no 
direct  reference  to  the  social  organisation.  St.  Paul, 
however,  spoke  of  the  relations  of  slave  and  master.3 

>  See  the  effort  of  Nicholas  I.  to  protect  the  divorced  wife  of 
King  Lothair.     Greenwood,  bk.  vii.,  ch.  4. 

2  Lecky,  ii.',  335;  Schaff,  iv.,  333;  Brace,  ch.  11. 

3  Philem.  10-21;  1  Tim.  vi.,  1-2;  Eph.  vi.,  5-7;  Col.  iii.,  22; 
Tit.  ii.,  9;  1  Pet.  ii.,  18. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    357 


"The  world  into  which  Christianity  was  born  recognised 
slavery  everywhere."1  The  early  Church  tolerated 
slavery,  but  emancipation  was  held  to  be  an  act  of 
Christian  charity2;  hence  converted  Christians  often 
freed  their  slaves  on  baptism.3  The  Church  Fathers 
recognised  the  institution  of  slavery  as  a  moral  wrong 
"established  on  a  legal  basis,  but  called  Chrstian  slaves 
brothers.  Lactantius  told  Constantine  that  slaves 
were  brothers  in  Jesus.4  Ambrose  suggested  that  the 
slave  might  be  even  superior  to  his  master,  s  Augus- 
tine held  that  slavery  was  a  sin  which  originated  in 
the  Noachian  curse,  but  that  Christ's  sacrifice  freed 
slaves,  consequently  the  curse  would  disappear. 6 

The  mediaeval  Church,  inheriting  the  patristic  view^ 
sought  rot  to  abolish  slavery,  but  to  ameliorate  it.^ 
Masters  were  requested,  therefore,  to  provide  spouses 
for  their  slaves.7  Prayers  were  offered  up  constantly 
for  the  removal  of  their  hardships.8  They  were 
granted  all  the  Church  feast  and  fast  days.9  Among 
the  Christians  there  were  many  acts  of  manumission.10 
Constantine  and  his  successors  enacted  many  laws 
favourable  to  slaves.11  The  barbarian  invasion,  how- 
ever, postponed  for  a  thousand  years  the  general 
emancipation  of  slaves.  The  Church  itself  was  a  slave- 
owner and  slaves  were  found  on  the  lands  of  convents, 

i  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  524. 

2  Lactantius,  Inst.  Div.,  vi.,  12;  Apostolic  Constitutions,  iv.,  9. 

3  Baronius,  Ann.,  284,  No.  15. 

4  Inst.  Div.,  v.,  14,  15. 

s  De  Joseph  Patriarch.,  ch.  iv.,  §  20,  21. 

e  City  of  God,  xix.,  15. 

»  Apostolic  Constitutions,  viii.,  38. 

8  Ibid.,  viii.,  13,  19. 

9  Ibid.,  39. 

1  °  Sozomen,  i.,  9. 

1  1  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  542. 


358     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

bishops,  and  Popes.1  Even  one  of  the  Popes,  Calistus, 
had  been  a  slave. 2  But  at  the  same  time  the  Church 
was  always  an  asylum  for  slaves  and  sought  to  protect 
them  from  cruel  masters.  Gregory  the  Great  declared 
that  all  slaves  held  by  Jews  were  free  3  and  also  emanci- 
pated heathen  slaves  upon  turning  Christian.  4  Thus^ 
both  bv  precept  and  example  the  Church  was  the  one 
great  force  paving  the  way  for  the  gradual  abolition 
of  slavery  5 

The  Church,  as  the  great  advocate  of  peace  and 
order,  strove  to  abolish  family  feuds,  blood-revenge, 
and  private  wars  bvsubstituting  legpl  art.inn  and  legal 
penalty  against  the  author  of  crime^6  The  synod  of 
Toledo  in  693  forbade  duels  and  private  feuds. 7  The 
synod  of  Charroux  in  989  and  the  Bishop  of  Puy  in 
990  proclaimed  the  "Peace  of  God."8  The  synod  of 
Poitiers  in  1004,  in  proclaiming  the  "Peace  of  God," 
decided  that  law  should  replace  force  in  determining 
questions  of  justice.  The  synod  of  Limoges  in  103 1 
issued  an  interdict  against  bloody  feuds.  The  Church 
everywhere  sought  to  have  disputes  settled  by  fines 
rather  than  fighting,  by  arbitration  rather  than  litiga- 
tion, by  witnesses  rather  than  by  duels.  The  efforts 
of  the  Church  in  this  era  of  lawlessness,  of  wanton 


»  Gregory  I.,  Ep.,  x.,  66;  ix.,  103. 

2  Hefele,  iii.,  6n.  Slaves  and  serfs  were  admitted  to  priesthood. 
Leo  I.  objected  to  the  practice  (letter  4). 

3  See  letters  of  Gregory  I.,  iv.,  9,  21;  vi.,  32;  vii.,  24;  ix.,  36,  no. 

4  For  a  statement  of  his  attitude  toward  slavery  and  for  an 
example  of  his  manumission,  see  book  vi.,  letter  12;  book  viii., 
letter  21. 

s  Balmes;  Brace,  ch.  21;  Schaff,  iv.,  334;  Lecky,  ii.,  66. 

*  Brace,  ch.  12. 

i  Hefele,  iii.,  349. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Nos.  240,  241. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    359 

bloodshed,  and  of  insecurity  of  property,  to  maintain 
peace  and  to  secure  justice  form  one  of  the  most 
glorious  chapters  in  her  remarkable  career.  The 
Popes  wrote  letters  and  published  encyclicals  to  recom- 
mend vows  and  habits  of  concord  to  all  Christian 
nations.  Great  councils  were  called  to  spread  abroad 
ideas  of  amity  and  brotherly  love.  The  clergy 
preached  it  and  enthusiastic  monks  went  from  village 
to  village  to  proclaim  it  in  the  name  of  the  ' '  Prince  of 
Peace."  A  veritable  crusade  of  peace  swept  over 
Europe,  and  denounced  war  as  anti -Christian.  Brother- 
hoods of  the  Peace  of  God  were  formed  to  curb  the 
militant  feudal  barons  and  to  protect  commerce,  agri- 
culture, women,  children,  travellers,  strangers,  and 
holy  clerks.  When  the  whole  ecclesiastical  machinery 
of  the  Church,  with  its  power  to  withhold  salvation 
gained  through  the  holy  sacraments  and  with  its 
mighty  weapons  of  excommunication  and  interdict, 
was  wielded  in  behalf  of  peace,  it  was  a  force  that 
could  not  easily  be  resisted. *  To  the  Church,  therefore, 
must  be  given  the  credit  of  making  the  first  determined" 
effort  to  limitT  if  not  to  abolish,  the  ravages  of  private1 

war.  v ( 

The  famous  "Truce  of  God,"  which  originated  in 
Aquitania  in  1033,  marks  a  new  era.2  Private  wac 
was  the  curse  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  the  Church  made 
an  effort  to  check  the  evil.  According  to  its  provisions, 
bishops  and  abbots  were  to  see  to  it  that  all  feuds 
should  cease  from  Wednesday  evening  till  Monday 
morning.  The  penalty  for  violating  the  truce  was  at 
first  excommunication,  but  later  expulsion  from  a 
bishopric,  loss  of  a  benefice  or  property,  severance  of 

1  Brace,  ch.  13. 

2  Hefele,  iv.,  698;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  242. 


360    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the    right    hand,    decapitation,    scalping,    and    other 
punishments  were  added.     Archbishop   Raimbald   of 
Aries  with  other  bishops  and  abbots  asked  the  Church 
in   Italy  in    1041   to  adopt    the   "Truce  of    God."1 
Pope  Nicholas  II.  (1059)  and  Alexander  II.  (1068)  made 
public  proclamation  of  the  peace,  and,  as  a  result  of 
all   these   endeavours,   it   soon   spread   over   France,2 
Italy,3  Burgundy,  Spain,  and  Germany.4     Rulers  were 
not  slow  to  sanction  and  to  enforce  these  peace  measures. 
Emperor  Henry  IV.  issued  an  edict  in  1085  to  enforce 
the  "Truce  of  God  "  under  frightfully  severe  penalties,  s 
Pope  Urban  II.  in  the  Council  of  Clermont,  held  a 
decade  later,  made  it  the  general  law  of  the  Church. 6 
The  time  was  extended  to  the  periods  between  Advent 
and  Epiphany,  Ash  Wednesday  and  Easter,  Ascension 
Day   and    Pentecost.7     Various   festivals    and   vigils 
were  also  included.     If  strictly  enforced  the  "Truce 
of  God  "  would  have  given  Christendom  peace  for  about 
240  days  out  of  the  year.     Its  operation  was  preceded 
by  the  ringing  of  bells.     The  first   Lateran  Councils 
(1121,  1139,  1179)  confirmed  it  and  made  it  a  part  of 
the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici.     The  "Truce  of  God  "  later 
helped  to  produce  the  "land  peace"  in  various  parts  of 
the  Empire.8 
j  The  Church  sanctioned  and  used  the  "judgment  of 

1  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §39. 

*  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Nos.  240-244. 
3  Ibid.,  No.  248. 

«  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  187;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Nos.  245- 
250;  Transl.  and  Rep.,  i.,  No.  2. 

*  Migne,  cli.,  1134;  Henderson,  208. 

6  Munro,  Urban  and  the  Crusaders;  Transl.  and  Rep.,  i.,  No.  2, 
p.  8. 

■>  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  cf.  Nos.  243  and  244.     Hefele,  iv.,  6q6. 

»  Fisher,  Med.  Europe,  i.,  201;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Nos. 
248-250. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    361 


God  "  or  the  ordeal  as  a  better  means  of  obtaining 
justice  than  by  war.1  This  process  of  justice  was  not 
new,  but  had  prevailed  in  the  Orient  and  among  the 
Celts  and  Teutons.  It  rested  on  this  fundamental  prin- 
ciple that  the  accused  is  guilty  until  he  proves  him- 
self innocent  and  that  God,  as  the  source  of  justice, 
will  protect  the  innocent.  "Let  doubtful  cases,"  ran  a 
Carolingian  capitulary,  "be  determined  by  the  judg- 
ment of  God.  The  judges  may  decide  that  which 
they  clearly  know,  but  that  which  they  cannot  know 
shall  be  reserved  for  divine  judgment.  He  whom 
God  has  reserved  for  His  own  judgment  may  not  be 
condemned  by  human  means." 

There  were  four  different  kinds  of  ordeals:  by  water, 
by  fire,  by  battle,  and  by  some  sacred  emblem. 2  The 
ordeal  by  hot  water  was  the  oldest  form  in  Europe.3 
It  typified  the  deluge  and  hell.  Hincmar  of  Rheims 
appears  to  have  recommended  it  first.  The  accused 
was  compelled,  with  naked  arm,  to  find  a  stone  or  ring 
in  a  kettle  of  boiling  water,  or  merely  to  thrust  his  arm 
into  it.  If  his  arm  was  scalded  he  was  guilty,  if  not, 
innocent.4  The  ordeal  by  cold  water  was  probably 
introduced  by  Pope  Eugenius  II.  (824-827).  The  the- 
ory was  that  pure  water  will  not  receive  a  criminal, 
hence  it  was  believed  that  the  guilty  would  float  and 
the  innocent  sink.  The  accused,  therefore,  was  bound 
and  thrown  into  the  water,  but  held  by  a  rope  with 
which  to  pull  him  out.5 

1  Lea,  Superstition  and  Force. 

2  Ogg,  Source  Book,  §33. 

3  Lea,  Superstition  and  Force,  196.  There  are  references  to  this 
form  in  the  Salic  Law. 

4  Greg,  of  Tours,  quoted  in  Lea,  198;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No. 

234- 

5  For  cases,  see  Lea,  228,  229;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  236,  237. 


362     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  ordeal  by  fire  was  performed  either  by  hot  iron 
or  stones,  or  by  a  pure  flame  of  fire.  The  accused  was 
compelled  to  walk  barefooted  over  six  or  twelve  red-hot 
ploughshares,  or  to  carry  a  piece  of  red-hot  iron  in  his 
bare  hand  nine  feet  or  more.  The  unburned,  of  course, 
were  innocent.1  Or  the  accused  was  asked  to  stick 
his  hand  into  a  flame,  or  walk  with  bare  feet  and  legs 
through  the  fire. 2 

The  battle  ordeals  were  very  old  and  widespread 
in  Europe  although  not  introduced  ^into  England  un- 
til the  Norman  Conquest.  They  were  used  for  both 
personal  and  international  disputes.  The  right  to  con- 
test was  usually  restricted  to  free  men,  but  the  young, 
sick,  old,  female,  and  clergy  could  furnish  substitutes. 
Here  again  God,  the  Judge  in  all  these  cases,  gave 
victory  to  the  innocent.3  The  Church  regarded  this 
form  of  ordeal  with  disfavour.  Both  councils  and 
Popes  declared  boldly  against  it.  Innocent  II.,  Alex- 
ander III.,  Clement  III.,  Celestin  III.,  and  Innocent 
III.  were  outspoken  in  their  opposition.  It  was  ex- 
pressly forbidden  the  clergy  to  engage  in  these  combats 
without  special  license.  Christian  burial  was  even 
refused  to  those  who  fell  in  such  combats.  Civil  law 
enforced  the  ecclesiastical  opposition  and  thus  gradually 
secured  the  elimination  of  the  evil.  This  ordeal  did 
not  die  out  until  the  sixteenth  century. 

The  sacred  ordeals  had  to  do  with  religious  emblems. 
In  the  ordeal  of  the  cross  both  the  accused  and  the 
defendant  stood  before  a  cross  with  uplifted  arms  while 
special  divine  service  was  performed,  or  the  arms  were 

>  Lea,  201;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  235. 

«  Peter  Ingens  and  the  monk  Savonarola  were  examples.  Lea, 
209. 

»  Lea,  75-174,  gives  cases. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    363 

extended  in  the  form  of  a  cross.  The  arms  of  the 
guilty  person  dropped  first.  Pepin  first  used  it  for 
divorce  cases  (752).  Charles  the  Great  extended  it  to 
territorial  disputes  (806) .  Louis  the  Pious  abolished  it 
in  816  because  it  brought  the  holy  symbol  into  disrepute. 
The  eucharist  was  likewise  employed  to  protect  the 
innocent  and  punish  the  guilty.  The  synod  of  Worms 
in  868  enjoined  it  upon  bishops  and  priests  accused 
of  murder,  adultery,  theft,  and  sorcery.  In  the  trial 
the  eucharist  was  swallowed  with  this  adjuration  from 
the  priest:  "May  this  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  be  a  judgment  to  thee  this  day."  In  the 
famous  encounter  of  Hildebrand  and  Henry  IV.  at 
Canosa,  the  Pope  challenged  the  Emperor  to  undergo 
this  ordeal,  but  the  wily  German  refused.1  A  use 
was  also  made  of  relics  for  similar  purposes — a  test 
that  was  probably  of  ecclesiastical  origin.  The  accused 
placed  his  hands  on  the  sacred  relics  and  made  an  oath 
of  his  innocence. 

The  Church  played  a  very  conspicuous  part  in  all 
these  ordeals.  Church  councils  sanctioned  them2  and 
the  clergy  favoured  them.  3  Not  infrequently  they 
were  used  to  further  the  interests  of  the  Church  and 
to  punish  heretics.  Priests  usually  prepared  the  con- 
testants by  fasts,  prayer,  and  special  service,  presided 
over  the  trial,  and  pronounced  judgment  in  God's 
name.  This  method  of  securing  justice,  however,  pro- 
voked considerable  opposition  within  the  Church.  As 
early  as  the  sixth  century  Bishop  Avitus  of  Vienne  op- 
posed the  battle  ordeal  in  the  BurgundianCode.  St.  Ago- 

«  For  other  cases,  see  Lea;    Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Nos.  238,  239. 

2  Mainz,  88o,Tribur,  895,  Tours,  925,  Auch,  1068,  Grau,  1095,  etc. 

3  Hincmar,  Burckhardt  of  Worms,  Gregory  VII.,  Calixtus  II., 
Eugenius  II.,  St.  Bernard,  etc. 


364     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


bard  of  Lyons  (d.  840)  wrote  two  enlightened  treatises 
against  the  duel  and  the  whole  system  of  the  ordeal.1 
Occupants  of  St.  Peter's  Chair  like  Leo  IV.,  Nicholas 
I.,  Stephen  VI.,  Sylvester  II.,  Alexander  II.,  Alexander 
III.,  Celestin  III.,  Honorius  III.,  all  condemned  the 
institution.2  The  famous  fourth  Lateran  Council  held 
under  Innocent  III.  in  1215  forbade  the  use  of  religious 
ceremonies  in  these  trials  and  thus  practically  abol- 
ished the  institution.  Secular  rulers  also  sought  to 
end  the  practice.  Unfortunately,  the  Inquisition,  which 
employed  methods  somewhat  similar  to  the  ordeal, 
followed  too  closely  in  its  wake. 

Perhaps  the  most  important  service  of  the  Church  to 
the  civilisation  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  the  extensive 
cultivation  of  charity,  "the  queen  of  the  Christian 
graces." 3  Both  the  example  and  teachings  of  Jesus 
served  as  a  model  and  were  supplemented  by  the  words 
and  work  of  the  Apostles,  particularly  Paul.  In  the 
early  Church  charity  was  a  cardinal  principle.4  At 
first  the  remnants  of  the  eucharistic  feasts  were  em- 
ployed as  sources  of  relief  to  the  poor  and  needy  \ 
later  free-will  offerings  given  to  the  bishop  and  collec- 
tions taken  in  the  churches  were  employed  to  the 
same  end.  Usually  seven  deacons  distributed  these 
contributions  to  the  poor,  sick,  and  needy  in  each 
congregation,  s 

In  Rome  the  organisation  of  charity  was  begun 
comparatively   early.     The  parish  was  introduced  in 


1  Given  in  Migne,  civ.,  113,  250. 

2  Read  Lea,  272. 

3  Lecky,  ii.,  84;  Uhlhorn,  Christ.  Char,  in  the  Anc.  Ch.,  bk.  iii. 

4  Chastel,  Historical  Studies  in  the  Influence  of  Charity.    Tr.,  Phil., 

1857. 

s  Schaff,  ii.,  374;  Justin  Martyr,  Apol.,  i.,  ch.  67. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    365 


the  third  century  and  in  the  fourth  century  Pope 
Anastasius  divided  Rome  into  fourteen  "regions"  and 
in  them  founded  and  endowed  deaconries.  Gregory 
the  Great  in  the  sixth  century  created  seven  dis- 
tricts in  Rome  ruled  over  by  seven  deacons  and  an 
archdeacon,  built  a  hospital  in  each  district,  con- 
trolled by  a  deacon  and  a  steward  for  the  poor,  sick, 
and  orphans;  and  formed  thirty  parishes  with  thirty- 
six  priests.  He  sold  his  extensive  possessions  and 
gave  the  proceeds  to  charity.  Many  of  the  great 
Fathers  of  the  Church  made  similar  sacrifices  and  never 
wearied  of  enjoining  the  duty  of  charity  on  Christians. 
The  churches  of  Rome  had  large  estates,  especially 
in  Sicily.  One  third  of  their  income  was  given  quarterly 
to  charities.1  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  also  made 
monthly  distributions  of  food  to  the  poor,  and  each  day 
sent  part  of  his  meals  to  feed  the  needy  at  his  door. 
This  model  arrangement  for  charitable  purposes  in  the 
capital  of  Christendom  was  copied  quite  extensively 
elsewhere  and  enlisted  the  services  of  thousands  of 
priests,  monks,  and  nuns  in  all  sections  of  western 
Europe. 

After  Constantine  legalised  Christianity,  charity  be- 
came institutional  and  endowed,  first  in  the  East, 
then  to  the  westward.2  Perhaps  the  first  public 
hospital  was  founded  in  Rome  by  Fabiola,  a  Roman 
lady,  in  the  fourth  century.  St.  Pammachus  estab- 
lished another  in  the  Eternal  City.  Paulinus  built  one 
in  Nola.  Still  others  were  planted  in  Naples,  Sicily, 
and  Sardinia.  Poorhouses,  orphanages,  and  homes 
for  the  aged  were  likewise  begun  in  this  early  period. 


1  Milman,  ii.,  117. 

2  Smith  and  Cheetham,  Diet,  of  Christ.  Antiq.,  art.  "Hospitals." 


366     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


As  Christianity  was  spread  over  Europe  by  the  mission- 
ary monks  these  charitable  institutions  were  planted 
by  it  to  help  and  comfort  thousands  in  this  period  of 
war,  famine,  and  pestilence,  and  to  remain  as  the 
choicest  heritage  to  the  modern  from  the  mediaeval 
Church.  In  theory,  mediaeval  charity  was  made  one 
of  the  chief  acts  of  piety,  the  most  certain  means  of 
salvation,  and  perhaps  emphasised  too  much  the  bene- 
fits to  the  donor  and  to  his  dead  relatives,  rather  than 
to  the  worthy  recipient. 

Church  discipline  originated  in  the  "power  of  the 
keys"  and  in  the  control  of  the  sacraments.  In  the 
early  Church  it  was  a  "purely  spiritual  jurisdiction."1 
After  Constantine,  however,  it  touched  the  civil  and 
social  status  of  the  delinquents.  During  the  entire 
Middle  Ages  it  was  a  tremendous  power  because  it  was 
believed  that  the  Church,  ruled  by  the  divinely  ap- 
pointed Pope  and  his  army  of  ecclesiastics,  was  the 
"dispenser  of  eternal  salvation "  and  that  exclusion  from 
her  communion  without  repentance  incurred  eternal 
damnation.  Discipline  was  administered  either  directly 
by  the  Pope  or  by  the  bishops  and  their  representatives, 
the  archdeacons,  or  in  each  congregation  by  the  priest. 
Civil  authorities  aided  the  Church  in  enforcing  disci- 
pline. Charles  the  Great  ordered  the  bishops  to  hold 
annual  public  synodical  courts  to  try  cases  of  incest, 
murder,  adultery,  robbery,  theft,  and  other  vices  con- 
trary to  God's  laws.2  The  clergy  and  laity  alike  were 
investigated.  Seven  irreproachable  synodal  judges  from 
each  congregation  reported  to  the  synod  on  the  state 
of   morals   and  religion.  3     Similar   synods   were  held 

1  Matt,  xviii.,  15-18. 

2  Gieseler,  ii.,  55. 

s  Moeller,  ii.,  115. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    367 


in  Spain  and  England  and  soon  came  to  be  common 
throughout  Europe.  The  ordinary  penalties  inflicted 
were  fines,  fasting,  pilgrimages,  scourging,  imprison- 
ment, and  deeds  of  charity.  Obstinate  cases  incurred 
excommunication.  The  penalties  inflicted  on  the  clergy 
were  more  severe  than  those  on  the  laity.1  About  the 
same  time  developed  the  practice  by  which  the  priest 
heard  the  confessions2  of  his  flock  and  doled  out  the 
punishment  for  their  private  offences.  But  by  the 
ninth  century  confession  to  a  priest  had  not  yet  )/ 
become  compulsory. 

The  most  severe  punishment  on  the  individual  was 
excommunication.3  It  could  be  pronounced  by  the 
Pope  against  a  layman,  either  king  or  common  man, 
or  against  a  bishop  or  priest;  or  by  a  bishop  against 
a  layman  or  a  priest.  Its  operation  was  direct  and  its 
effects  severe.  It  cut  the  excommunicate  off  from 
the  sacraments  which  alone  could  insure  his  salvation 
and  subjected  him  to  temporal  punishments.  As  long  as 
he  was  under  the  ban,  he  was  a  social  outcast,  like  an 
outlawed  criminal  or  a  dangerous  wild  beast,  debarred 
from  all  social  greetings,  food,  shelter,  and  all  inter- 
course. To  kill  him  was  not  murder  and  he  was  left 
to  die  in  lonely  starvation.  By  the  secular  law,  too, 
he  lost  all  civil  rights,  could  be  seized  and  thrown  into 
prison,  and  forfeited  to  the  state  all  his  property.4  His 
whole  family,  likewise,  were  subject  to  the  same  dis- 
abilities.5 If  a  king,  his  subjects  were  all  released 
from  allegiance  to  him.     He  was  consigned  to  ever- 

>  Milman,  i.,  551. 

2  See  Cath.  Encyc.  for  the  origin  of  the  confessional. 

3  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist,  236. 

4  Ibid.,  296,  416. 
s  Ibid.,  393. 


368      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


lasting  punishment,  often  with  the  most  terrific  curses, 
which  were  frequently  written  down  with  sacred  wine 
and  ink.  This  terrible  fate  dangled  over  the  head  of 
every  member  of  the  Church,  dead  as  well  as  alive, 
but,  of  course,  it  followed  only  after  the  proof  of  guilt 
had  been  established  in  a  careful,  formal  trial  and 
after  earnest  entreaties  to  repent  had  been  made. 
The  theory,  however,  was  too  often  abused.1  With 
sincere  repentance  the  punishment  ceased  and  absolu- 
tion followed.2 

There  are  examples  almost  without  number  of  the 
employment  of  excommunication,  but  a  few  con- 
spicuous examples  will  suffice  to  show  its  operation. 
Ambrose  in  383  excommunicated  Maximus  for  murder- 
ing Gratian,  the  Emperor.3  Gregory  the  Great  ex- 
communicated Archbishop  Maximus  of  Salona  and 
forced  him  to  repentance  (600). 4  The  Archbishop  of 
Sens  (seventh  century)  launched  the  curse  against 
unknown  robbers  of  his  church.5  Pope  Benedict  VIII. 
excommunicated  the  despoiler  of  the  monastery  of 
St.  Giles. 6  There  were  very  many  cases  against  kings, 
criminals,  heretics,  etc.,  and  the  punishment  was  even 
applied  to  animals.  Thus  in  975  the  Archbishop  of 
Treves  excommunicated  the  annoying  sparrows.  Cat- 
erpillars which  were  ravishing  the  diocese  of  Laon  were 
put  under  the  ban  in  11 20  by  the  bishop.  Even  St. 
Bernard,  on  an  occasion  which  may  have  been  justifi- 
able, pronounced  an  anathema  in  1121  on  a  swarm  of 

«  Lea,  264,  266,  303,  343,  345,  347,  362,  382,  421. 

2  The  anathema  was  used  in  a  sense  and  manner  similar  to 
excommunication.     See  Cath.  Encyc.  for  an  excellent  discussion. 

3  Lea,  282. 
*  Ibid.,  298. 
s  Ibid.,  303. 

6  Ibid.,  337;  Schaff,  iv.,  377. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    369 

flies  which  bothered  him  while  he  was  making  a  pious 
speech.1  Not  only  was  this  ecclesiastical  cudgel 
used  with  the  most  telling  effects  in  enforcing  the 
law  of  the  Church  upon  the  disobedient  and  unbelieving, 
but  it  was  not  infrequently  abused  for  personal  revenge 
and  spite  or  for  other  low  motives.2 

The  interdict  was  another  form  of  punishment, 
issued  by  a  Pope  or  a  bishop,  against  a  city,  diocese, 
•district,  or  country,  and  involved  the  innocent  along 
with  the  guilty.  It  had  a  counterpart  among  the 
barbarian  tribes  which  made  the  family  responsible  for 
the  crimes  of  individual  members.  This  may  have  been 
its  origin,  for  the  Church  adopted  the  same  idea  in 
applying  excommunication  to  the  barbarians.  It 
began  in  a  mild  form  as  early  as  the  fifth  century,  but 
•ere  long  was  a  common  punishment.  The  city  of 
Rouen  was  put  under  the  interdict  in  586  for  the  murder 
•of  its  bishop. 3  The  Bishop  of  Laon  in  869  pronounced 
the  interdict  on  his  diocese,  but  Archbishop  Hincmar 
of  Rheims  removed  it.  The  synod  of  Limoges  enforced 
the  "Truce  of  God"  in  103 1  by  this  means. 4  Gregory 
VII.  applied  it  to  the  province  of  Gnesen  to  punish 
King  Boleslaw  II.  for  the  crime  of  murder,  and  Alexan- 
der II.  in  1 180  thus  afflicted  all  Scotland  because  the 
ruler  expelled  a  papal  bishop.  Innocent  III.  in  1200 
suspended -it  over  France,  because  of  the  marital  faith- 
lessness of  Philip  Augustus,  and  for  six  years  enforced 
it  in  England  (1208)  to  humble  King  John.  Its  opera- 
tion was  very  severe.  All  religious  worship  was  sus- 
pended, the  churches  were  closed,  priests  refused  to 

»  Lea,  428. 

2  Ibid.,  416;  Gregory  the  Great,  bk.  ii.,  Letter  34. 

3  Greg,  of  Tours,  bk.  viii.,  ch.  31. 

*  Gieseler,  ii.,  199,  n.  12;  Hefele,  iv.,  693-695;  Schaff,  iv.,  380. 
24 


37°     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


perform  marriage  and  burial  ceremonies,  the  people 
were  ordered  to  fast  as  in  Lent  and  were  forbidden 
to  shave  or  cut  their  hair.1  Only  the  sacraments  of 
baptism  and  extreme  unction  could  be  administered 
and  then  always  behind  closed  doors.  Penance  and 
the  eucharist  could  be  extended  alone  to  the  mortally 
sick.  All  inhabitants  of  the  afflicted  region  were  or- 
dered to  dress  in  mourning,  fast,  and  act  in  humility. 
Church  bells  were  tolled  at  certain  hours  in  the  day, 
when  all  people  were  to  fall  upon  their  knees  in  prayer 
for  the  removal  of  the  causes  of  the  interdict.  With 
such  thunderbolts  as  the  excommunication  and  inter- 
dict in  the  hands  of  the  great  High  Priest  of  the  Church, 
which  could  be  hurled  at  will  against  any  individual 
or  people,  and  when  the  people  blindly  and  unquestion- 
ably submitted  to  them,  it  can  be  seen  how  the  power 
of  the  Papacy  was  augmented  and  the  subjection  of  the 
clergy  and  laity  alike  increased. 

The  rnas^  was  the  very  centre  of  all  Church  worship. 
Pope  Gregory  I.  established  its  mediaeval  form.  The 
celebration  of  the  mass  was  the  bloodless  sacrifice 
of  Christ  to  God  for  the  world's  sins,  a  reconciliation  of 
heaven  and  earth,  of  benefit  to  the  living  and  to  the 
pious  dead.  It  is  no  wonder  then  that  the  mass  was 
celebrated  several  times  daily  with  the  greatest  ritualis- 
tic pomp  and  display.  Masses  for  the  dead,  too,  be- 
came popular  as  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  developed  2 
and  were  usually  celebrated  as  solitary  masses.  Lullus 
even  ordered  masses  and  fasts  in  order  to  obtain  good 
weather.3  The  dogma  of  transubstantiation  while 
generally  held  had  net  yet  become  Church  law.    Church 

»  Harduin,  vi.,  885. 

2  Gregory  I.  is  usually  credited  with  introducing  this  mass. 

3  Moeller,  ii.,  113 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    371 


worship  throughout  western  Europe  was  conducted  in 
Latin,  and  consequently  was  little  understood  by  the 
masses  of  the  laity. 

Although  preaching  was  not  a  necessary  part  of  the 
regular  Church  service,  still  it  was  not  an  unusual  fea- 
ture. Pope  Gregory  I.  frequently  preached  with  great 
earnestness,  although  his  successors  did  not  follow  his 
example.  Bishops  were  required  to  preach,  but  their 
negligence  was  proverbial.1  The  priests  were  com- 
manded to  explain  to  their  people  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the  nature  of  the  sacraments. 
The  models  recommended  were  the  homilies,2  and  the 
sermons  of  Gregory  I.3  The  vernacular  was  used  of 
course  in  all  preaching  and  cathedral  instruction. 

The  Church  hymns  of  this  period  reflect  the  Christian 
life  and  worship.  In  the  Latin  Church  the  hymns  are 
divided  into  three  periods:  the  patristic  epoch  to 
Gregory  I.  (d.  604)  ;  the  mediaeval  epoch  to  Damiani  (d. 
io73)  J  and  the  classical  epoch  to  1300.  These  Latin 
hymns  possess  much  fervour  and  some  genius,  and  have 
a  very  pronounced  character.  Most  of  them  were 
inspired  by  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  next  in  favour 
came  the  saints.  There  were  many  beautiful  products 
like  Te  Deum  Laudamus.4  In  the  early  churches  no 
organ  was  used.s     Pope  Vitalian  (657-672)  probably 

»  Hefele,  iii.,  758,  764;  iv.,  89,  in,  126,  197,  513,  582;  Mansi,  xiv., 
82. 

2  Mon.  Ger.  Scrip.,  vi.-ix.,  45-187;  Wattenbach,  Deutschal. 
Geschichtsq.,  i.,  134. 

3  Hefele,  iii.,  745. 

4  Stephenson,  Latin  Hymns  of  the  An.-Sax.  Church;  Trench, 
Sacred  Latin  Poets;  Chandler,  Hymns  of  the  Prim.  Ch.;  Mant.,  Anc. 
Hymns  from  the  Rom.  Breviary;  Cazwell,  Lyra  Catholica;  Neale, 
Medicev.  Hymns;  Schaff,  Christ,  in  Song. 

s  This  is  the  practice  of  the  Greek  Church  to-day,  and  also  in 
Several  Protestant  bodies. 


372     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


first  employed  one,  while  Pepin  and  Charles  the  Great 
both  received  presents  of  this  instrument  from  the 
East.  After  the  eighth  century  it  was  generally  used 
during  the  Middle  Ages.1  Church  bells  gradually 
came  into  use  after  the  time  of  Constantine  and  were 
very  numerous  during  this  period.2 

The  origin  of  the  term  sacrament  is  not  very  clear. 
The  Latin  sacramentum  meant  the  military  oath  of 
•allegiance  and  the  early  Fathers  apparently  used  it 
in  that  sense.3  It  was  also  spoken  of  as  mysterium 
in  the  New  Testament.4  Sacramentum  was  thus 
early  united  with  mysterium  to  denote  the  solemn, 
instructive,  semi-secret,  external  religious  rites  of 
worship.  Augustine's  definition,  "the  visible  form  of 
invisible  grace,"  or  "a  sign  of  a  sacred  thing,"  has 
become  classic  and  was  accepted  for  centuries.  The 
number  of  sacraments  was  an  evolution.  Tertullian 
mentions  but  two,  the  eucharist  and  baptism.  Cyprian 
spoke  of  a  third,  confirmation.  The  Vulgate  apparently 
added  a  fourth,  marriage.5  Augustine  mentioned  the 
Lord's  Supper  and  baptism  particularly  as  sacraments 
but  used  the  word  in  many  other  applications.  The 
old  "  sacramentaries  "  of  the  eighth  century  and  later 
extend  the  word  sacrament  to  a  great  variety  of  rites 
such  as  blessing  of  the  holy  water,  dedicating  churches, 
etc.,  and  have  prayers  and  benedictions  for  the  same. 
Robanus  Maurus  (d.  856)  advocated  four  and  Pascha- 
siusRodbertus  (d.  865)  two  sacraments,  while  Dionysius 

1  Hopkins  and  Rimbault,  The  Organ,  its  Hist,  and  Const.,  1855. 
See  art.  in  Smith  and  Cheetham. 

2  See  art.  in  Smith  and  Cheetham. 

3  Tertullian,  Ad.  Mort.,  iii.;  Vulgate  iii.,  16;  Rev.  i.,  20;  xxviii.,  7. 
«  Rom.  xvi.,  25;  1  Cor.  xiii.,  2. 

5  Eph.  v.,  22. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    373 


Areopagita  believed  in  six  and  Peter  Damiani  (d.  1072) 
enumerated  twelve.  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  (d.  1141) 
asserted  that  there  were  thirty,  but  Peter  Lombard 


(d.  1 164)  and  Thomas  Aquinas  (1274)  fixed  on  seven 
as  the  number,  though  they  were  not  officially  adopted 
by  the  Church  until,  143.9' 

The  sacraments  were  the  means  of  grace  and  spiritual 
food  for  the  soul.  They  met  the  child  at  birth  in 
baptism,  accompanied  him  in  life,  and  closed  his 
eyes  with  extreme  unction  in  death. 

The  most  important  of  the  sacraments  was  the 
eucharist.  This  solemn  festival  seems  to  have  been 
at  first  a  regular  meal,  probably  the  principal  meal 
of  the  day  in  each  family,  at  which  the  commemorative 
breaking  of  bread  and  partaking  of  the  cup  was  a 
part.  Subsequently,  however,  the  local  congregation 
met  on  this  common  basis.  Certain  abuses  which 
resulted1  led  to  the  early  separation  of  the  agape, 
or  love-feast,  from  the  ministration  of  the  eucharist 
of  the  bread  and  wine.  Henceforth  the  eucharist 
became  a  distinct  institution  celebrated  soon  with  sol- 
emn pomp  by  the  priesthood  alone.  It  was  regarded 
as  the  symbol  of  unity  among  believers  and  of  commun- 
ion with  the  Deity.  It  became  the  test  of  Christian 
fellowship  and  membership.  In  the  hands  of  the 
mediaeval  priesthood,  it  was  a  most  effectual  power, 
since  the  Church  could  withhold  it  and  thus  make 
those  deprived  of  it  outcasts  certain  of  eternal  damna- 
tion. Because  of  its  grave  importance,  the  Church 
made  participation  frequent  and  obligatory — and  even 
administered  it  to  infants  and  to  the  dead.  In  the 
early    Church    the    eucharist    was    celebrated    every 

1  1  Cor.  ch.  xi. 


374    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Lord's  Day  and  on  the  anniversaries  of  the  martyrs. 
Later  it  was  offered  every  day  and  after  the  time  of 
Leo  the  Great  several  times  a  day  as  a  daily  sacrifice' 
for  daily  sins.  The  celebration  of  the  eucharist. 
was  called  the  mass — the  culmination  of  all  Christian 
I  worship — to  which,  however,  only  those  fully  initiated 
into  Church  membership  were  admitted.1 

Baptism  was  likewise  a  very  important  sacrament. 
Although  there  is  no  evidence  that  Jesus  ever  performed 
the  rite,  still  the  New  Testament  shows  that  the  Apostles 
and  evangelists  did.2  Immersion  and  sprinkling  were 
both  early  employed.  The  priest  of  course  performed 
the  rite,  though  in  cases  of  urgency  any  person  using 
the  proper  formula  could  do  so.  The  effects  produced 
by  baptism  were:  regeneration ;  the  infusion  of  sanctify- 
ing grace ;  the  gifts  of  faith,  hope,  and  charity  ;  the 
remission  of  all  sin,  both  original  and  actual,  and  also 
of  all  penalty  due  to  sin,  both  temporal  and  eternal. 
Because  of  the  great  efficacy  and  the  indelible  character 
imparted  by  this  sacrament,  also  its  absolute  necessity 
to  salvation,  it  was  common  for  catechumens  to  post- 
pone the  rite  until  the  end  of  life  drew  near — as  did 
Constantine  the  Great — for  then  it  would  wipe  away  all 
past  records.  Elaborate  ceremonies  in  connection  with 
baptism  early  developed.  Candidates  for  the  rite,  called 
catechumens,  were  forced  to  undergo  a  long  course 
of  instruction.  They  could  not  witness  the  mysteries 
of  the  eucharist,  but  were  dismissed  after  the  response 
and    genuflections.     After    baptism,    which   was    ad- 

•  The  catechumens,  pagans,  and  heretics  were  not  admitted. 
From  the  words  used  in  dismissing  the  catechumens,  when  the 
mysteries  were  about  to  be  celebrated, — he,  missa  est, — probably 
arose  the  use  of  the  word  "mass." 

2  Acts  ii.,  38-41;  viii.,  16,  37,  38;  xix.,  3-5;  Matt,  xxviii.,  19. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    375 

ministered  usually  on  great  Church  festivals,  especially 
Whitsunday,  the  catechumens  were  received,  given 
a  Christian  name,  turned  to  the  west  to  renounce  the 
"devil  and  his  works,"  exorcised  by  the  priest,  an- 
ointed with  holy  oil,  and  instructed  in  the  fundamen- 
tals of  Christian  doctrine.  Often  an  entire  day  was 
consumed  in  these  ceremonies.  The  act  of  baptism 
with  consecrated  water  was  performed  at  the  entrance 
to  the  church  and  usually  the  baptised  received  a  white 
garment  in  token  of  his  purity.1  Beautiful  baptiste- 
ries were  early  built  either  within  the  church  or  very 
near  to  the  entrance. 

In  the  Apostolic  Church  baptism  was  invariably  con- 
nected with  the  imposition  of  hands.2  Later,  however, 
the  two  acts  were  separated.  The  laying  on  of  hands 
in  point  of  time  came  soon  after  the  rite  of  baptism.  3 
All  priests  could  baptise,  while  only  the  bishops  could 
perform  the  ceremony  which  gradually  developed 
into  the  sacrament  of  confirmation.  The  permanent 
separation  of  baptism  and  confirmation  did  not  occur, 
it  seems,  until  the  thirteenth  century.  The  rite  of 
baptism  was  ordinarily  performed  only  in  special 
baptismal  churches  and  at  certain  stated  periods.  In 
popular  opinion  the  baptised  were  placed  under  the 
protection  and  consecration  of  the  divine  power. 
The  rite  also  signified  subjection  to  the  Church. 

Penance  was  a  sacrament  and  a  pronounced  institu- 
tion of  the  Church  of  the  Middle  Ages.     The  New  Testa- 

1  This  robe,  after  being  worn  for  some  time,  was  frequently- 
hung  up  in  the  church  after  the  ceremony  to  remind  the  baptised 
one  of  his  new  status. 

2  Acts  viii.,  12-17,  xix.,  5,  6. 

3  Council  of  Elvira  (306),  canon  38.  See  Tertullian  for  one  of 
the  earliest  explanations. 


376     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


ment  has  in  it  but  little  on  the  subject  of  discipline.1 
In  the  early  Church  penance  was  exclusively  spiritual, 
was  not  compulsory  but  had  to  be  sought,  occurred  but 
once,  was  extended  only  to  baptised  communicants, 
always  followed  public  confession  before  the  whole 
congregation,  and  varied  with  the  offence.  The  peni- 
tents removed  all  ornaments  from  their  persons, 
dressed  in  sackcloth,  the  men  shaved  their  heads  and 
faces  and  the  women  wore  dishevelled  hair,  put  ashes  on 
their  heads,  abstained  from  baths  and  all  normal  pleas- 
ures, and  lived  on  bread  and  water.  They  were  divided 
into  four  classes:  (i)  The  weepers,  who  could  only 
stand  at  the  church  doors  and  beg  for  prayers.  (2) 
The  hearers,  who  could  enter  the  church  for  the  scripture 
lesson,  but  had  to  leave  before  the  eucharistic  service 
began.  (3)  The  kneelers,  who  could  witness  the  first 
part  of  the  eucharistic  office  and  then  departed  with 
the  catechumens.  (4)  The  standers,  who  could  remain 
during  the  whole  service  but  were  not  permitted  to 
communicate. 

Out  of  these  earlier  conditions,  penance  came  to 
be  regarded  as  a  sacrament  instituted  by  Jesus  for 
removing  sins  committed  after  baptism  but  involving 
contrition  of  heart  and  private  confession  to  a  priest  as 
prerequisites,2  and  for  the  performance  of  good  works, 
such  as  fasting,  almsgiving,  pilgrimages,  endowing 
institutions  of  the  Church,  self-flagellation,  etc.  The 
priest  then  solemnly  absolved  the  penitent.  The 
Middle  Ages  produced  regular  "penitential  books,"  3 

1  Matt,  xviii.,  17,  18;  1  Cor.  v.;  2  Cor.  ii.,  6-10. 

2  Mansi,  Coll.  Concil.,  xiv.,  33d  canon  of  Council  of  Chalons  (813). 

3  The  best  known  of  these  books  was  compiled  under  the  direc- 
tion of  Theodore,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (669-690).  It  is 
given  in  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.,  173.     The  Venerable  Bede  also 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    377 

that  is,  a  code  of  penalties  for  sins  like  drunkenness, 
fornications,  avarice,  perjury,  murder,  heresy,  idolatry, 
and  other  crimes.  These  regulations  were  compiled 
from  the  Church  Fathers,  the  Church  synods  and 
councils  down  to  the  seventh  century,  and  other  collec- 
tions of  authoritative  sources.  Nearly  every  diocese 
had  its  own  special  penitential  code,  but  the  general 
character  and  spirit  were  essentially  the  same  all 
over  the  Church.  Out  of  the  system  of  penance  grew 
the  practice  of  indulgences,  which  was  simply  the 
substitution  of  a  payment  in  money  for  the  penance. 
Archbishop  Theodore  of  Canterbury  is  usually  credited 
with  originating  the  principle  of  penance  and  the 
institution  of  indulgences,1  but  the  system  did  not 
gain  prominence  until  the  time  of  the  Crusades.2 

Ordination  was  the  sacrament  of  the  hierarchy 
by  which  baptised  persons  were  consecrated  to  perform 
the  duties  of  priesthood.  Like  baptism  it  conferred 
an  indelible  character,  hence  could  not  be  repeated. 
The  sacrament  of  extreme  unction  was  at  first  merely 
the  use  of  consecrated  oil  to  heal  the  sick.  3  But  before 
long  such  veneration  was  bestowed  upon  the  holy  oil 
that  as  early  as  the  fourth  century  people  broke  into 
the  churches  and  stole  the  oil  out  of  the  lamps  in  order 
to  use  it  for  the  working  of  miraculous  cures.  It  was 
employed  not  alone  by  the  priests,  but  by  all  Christians. 
It  did  not  really  become  a  sacrament  until  the  time  of 

made  a  similar  collection.  Ibid.,  326.  See  quotations  in  Schaff,  iv.,. 
374.  See  Marshall,  The  Penitential  Discip.  of  the  Print.  Ch.,  Lond., 
1814;  new  ed.  in  Lib.  of  Cath.  Theol.,  Oxf.,  1844. 

1  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.,  371. 

2  See  Green,  Indulgences,  etc.,  Lond.,  1872,  and  Gibbings,  The 
Taxes  of  the  Apost.  Pen.,  Dub.,  1872. 

3  See  Mark  vi.,  13;  Jas.  v.,  14,  15;  Tertullian,  Ad.  Scap.,  4; 
Chrysostom,  Horn.,  32. 


378    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


k 


Peter  Lombard.     Marriage  was  also  held  to  be  a  sacra- 
ment, through  which  the  priesthood  controlled  legit- 
imacy, inheritance,  and  the  validity  of  wills. 
f-      Out  of  pagan  idolatry,  hero-worship,  and  the  venera- 
\    tion  for  the  martyrs  of  the  early  Church  grew  both  the 

I    practice  of  saint-worship  and  the  use  of  relics.     The 

\  day  of  the  martyr's  death  was  made  a  festival  and 
the  place  of  his  burial  was  sanctified.  It  was  believed 
that  the  martyrs  had  the  power  to  intercede  with  the 
Divine  Powers  for  the  answer  of  prayers.  Churches 
and  shrines  were  built  over  the  tombs  of  the  martyrs, 
or  their  bones  were  carried  into  churches.  These  relics 
were  thought  to  possess  miracle-working  power. 
Those  places  not  blessed  with  relics  felt  it  to  be  a  great 
disadvantage,  consequently  imported  the  remains  of 
martyrs  and  saints  to  meet  the  need.  Regular  calen- 
dars of  saints  appeared  and  children  were  named  after 
\     them  with  the  expectation  of  lifelong  protection  and 

V_a,ssistance  from  the  patron. 

By  the  fourth  century  it  was  believed  that  the  blessed 
martyrs,  through  communion  with  our  Lord,  shared 
in  his  attributes  of  omnipresence  and  omniscience. 
Prayers  in  behalf  of  the  saints  changed  to  prayers  to 

p  them  for  help.     This  transition  was  particularly  easy 
I     \    for  those  who  were  won  from  paganism  because  they 

V.were  already  accustomed  to  similar  practices.  A  festi- 
val of  All  Saints  was  instituted  by  Pope  Boniface  IV. 
in  610,  when  the  Pantheon  was  dedicated  as  a  Christian 
church,  though  it  was  not  commonly  observed  until 
the  ninth  century,  when  Louis  the  Pious  made  it 
general  in  the  Empire.  The  festival  of  All  Souls 
supplemented  it  in  the  tenth  century  and  became 
very  popular.  Every  day  in  the  calendar  was  dedi- 
cated  to   one   saint    or   more.     Down    to   the   tenth 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    379 


century  individuals  renowned  for  some  pious  deed 
or  for  some  suffering  on  account  of  the  Christian  faith 
were  exalted  to  sainthood  by  the  voice  of  the  people 
with  the  consent  of  the  bishop.  Later,  however,  the 
bishops  nominated  the  saints  and  the  Pope  conferred  the 
honour.  The  first  instance  of  papal  canonisation  was 
that  of  Ulrich,  the  Bishop  of  Augsburg,  by  John  XV. 
in  973.  Pope  Alexander  III.  (11 70),  in  the  period 
when  the  Papacy  was  becoming  all-powerful,  seized  this 
great  prerogative  into  his  own  hands.1  Each  nation, 
district,  city,  and  individual  church  had  its  saint.  The 
fame  of  the  saints  was  perpetuated  by  legend,  hymn, 
painting,  sculpture,  and  the  sacred  edifices  built  to 
their  memory  and  honour.  Consequently  the  tales 
and  beliefs  connected  with  the  saints  produced  most 
of  the  literature  of  the  Middle  Ages — the  poetry,  the 
song,  the  history,  and  the  subject  of  common  thought, 
conversation,  and  feeling. 

Closely  connected  with  saint-worship  was  the  univer- 
sal use  of  sacred  relics  and  a  belief  in  their  miraculous 
power.  The  dominant  interest '  of  popular  piety 
circles  around  the  saints  and  their  relics.  The  relics 
in  the  church  were  the  greatest  treasure  of  the  com- 
munity, and  the  reliquary  was  the  choicest  ornament 
of  the  private  room  of  the  lady,  in  the  knight's  armory, 
in  the  king's  hall,  and  in  the  bishop's  palace.  The 
use  of  relics  and  images  developed  comparatively  early 
in  the  life  of  the  Church.2  By  the  time  of  Constantine 
the  practice  was  common  and  approved  by  the  Fathers. 
In  fact,  so  wild  were  the  people  of  the  West  for  relics 
that  imperial  law  had  to  prohibit  the  cutting  of  the 


1  Mabillon,  Act.  St.  Benedict,  v.,  Pref.;   Mansi,  xix.,  169-179. 

2  See  Chap.  XIV.  for  a  full  account  of  the  origin  of  image- worship. 


380     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


j  corpses  of  martyrs  into  pieces  for  sale.1  The  great 
Ambrose  refused  to  consecrate  a  church  which  had  no 
refics.  When  the  Pantheon  was  dedicated  by  Pope 
Boniface  IV.  twenty-eight  cartloads  of  bones  of 
martyrs  were  transferred  to  that  building  from  the  vari- 
ous cemeteries.2  The  seventh  oecumenical  council  of 
Nicasa  (787)  forbade  bishops  to  dedicate  a  church  with - 

)  out  sacred  relics  under  penalty  of  excommunication. 
Traffic  in  relics  became  a  regular  business.  St.  Augus- 
tine reproved  the  wandering  monks  for  selling  bogus 
relics.  Gregory  the  Great  refused  to  send  relics  of  St. 
Paul  to  the  Empress  of  Constantinople,  yet  he  very 
jealously  distributed  the  filings  of  the  chain  of  St. 
Peter.  The  relics  increased  until  western  Europe  was 
full  of  them  and  every  community  had  miracle-working 
wonders — the  products  of  excessive  piety,  fraud,  and 
credulity.  All  Christians  believed  in  relics  for  it  was  an 
impious  thing  to  doubt.  The  wood  of  the  true  cross 
"grew  into  a  forest";  the  nails  were  very  numerous; 

/at  Sens  was  found  the  rod  of  Moses;  at  Aachen  the 
swaddling  clothes  of  Jesus ;  at  other  points  a  feather 
plucked  from  the  wing  of  the  angel  Gabriel,  the  tears 
of  Jesus,  the  milk  of  the  Virgin,  the  emblems  of  the 
Passion,  a  piece  of  wood  from  the  temple  which  St. 
Peter  intended  to  build  on  the  Mount  of  Olives;  and 
the  bones,  hair,  teeth,  and  garments  of  saints  without 
number.  These  relics  were  employed  to  convert 
the  heathen,3  to  heal  diseases,  to  ward  off  danger,4 
to  punish  the  wicked,  to  protect  the  innocent,  and  to 
bring  good  luck  and  general  blessing. 

»  Cod.  Theod.,  ix.,  17,  7. 
J  This  statement  is  given  in  Baronius. 
-s*  3  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  3^5. 
*  Greg,  of  Tours,  bk.  i.,  ch.  84. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    381 


The  worship  of  Mary  the  Mother  of  Jesus  became  ' 
very  pronounced  after  the  fourth  century.  Tertullian 
put  Eve  and  Mary  alongside  of  Adam  and  Jesus. 
She  was  called  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  the  Mother  of 
God.  The  festival  of  the  Annunciation  held  in  the 
fifth  century  soon  led  to  the  festival  of  the  Purification 
of  Mary,  or  the  Candlemas  of  Mary.  About  the  end  of 
the  sixth  century  developed  the  feast  of  the  Ascension 
of  Mary,  to  be  followed  the  next  century  by  the  cele- 
bration of  the  birthday  of  Mary.  High  above  all  the 
saints  and  martyrs  was  the  rapturous  adoration  of 
the  "Queen  of  Heaven."  After  Gregory  the  Great  the 
Virgin  played  a  constantly  increasing  part  in  the 
Church  of  the  West.  Churches  were  erected  in  her 
honour  everywhere  and  every  church  had  at  least  a 
chapel  consecrated  to  Our  Lady. 

Hell,  heaven,  and  purgatory  were  very  real  indeed  to 
the  mediaeval  mind.  Their  location,  form,  and  inhab- 
itants were  known  exactly  through  mediaeval  credulity. 
Devils  and  angels  were  in  constant  communication 
in  one  way  or  another  with  the  inhabitants  of  earth. 
All  these  forces  and  influences  formed  the  mediaeval 
mind  and  produced  the  mediaeval  civilisation. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — The  Church  Fathers.     See  Chap.  X. 

2. — The  Acts  of  Church  Councils.     See  Chap.  IX. 

3. — The  Early  Church  Historians.  See  Chap. 
XIII. 

4. — Gee,  H.,  and  Hardy,  W.  J.,  Documents  Illus- 
trative of  English  Church  History.  Lond., 
1896.    I.,  59. 

5. — Henderson,  E.  F.,  Select  Historical  Docu- 
ments of  the  Middle  Ages.     N.  Y.,  1892. 

6. — Ogg,  Source  Book. 


382      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


7. — Robinson,  J.  H.,  Readings,  i. 

8. — Thatcher  and  McNeal,  Source  Book. 

9. — Univ.  of  Penn.,  Translations  and  Reprints. 

Bibliographical  Note: — The  original  sources  for 
this  phase  of  the  history  of  the  Church  are 
nearly  all  in  Latin:  1  ,—M.igne,  Patrologia.  2. — 
Mansi,  Sacrorum  Conciliorum  Collectio.  3. — 
Pertz,  et  al.,  Monumenta  Germance  Historica. 
4. — Muratori,  L.  A.,  Rerum  Italicarum  Scrip- 
tores.  Med.,  1723-51.  28  vols.  5. — Jaffe\ 
Biblioiheca  rerum  Germanicarum.  6. — Wat- 
terich,  Pontificum  Romanorum.  7. — Du- 
chesne, Le  Liber  Pontificalis.  8. — Bouquet, 
M.,  Rerum  Gallicarum  et  Francicarum  Scrip- 
tores.  Paris,  1868  ff.  23  vols.  9. — Rerum 
Historica  Britannica.  Lond.,  1858^.  10. — 
Jaffe,  Regesta  Pontificum  Romanorum.  11. — 
Potthast,  A.,  Regesta  Pontificum  Romanorum 
(1198-1304).  12. — Pflug-Harttung,  J.  v., 
Acta  Pontificum  Romanorum  Inedita.  Tub., 
1 88 1.  Stutg.,  1884-8.  13. — Mirbt,  Quellen 
zur  Geschichte  des  Papsttum. 

B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Andrews,    W.,    Curiosities    of    the    Church. 

Lond.,  1891. 
2. — Balmes,  J.,  European  Civilisation:  Protestant- 
ism and  Catholicism  Compared  in  their  Effects 

on  the  Civilisation  of  Europe.     Lond.,  1849. 
3. — Baring-Gould,    S.,    Curious    Myths    of    the 

Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1869. 
4. — Bethune-Baker,     J.    F.,    The    Influence    of 

Christianity  on  War.     Camb.,  1888. 
5. — Brace,  C.  J.,  Gesta  Christi.     Lond.,  1886. 
6. — Buckle,    H.    T.,    History   of   Civilisation  in 

England.     N.  Y.,  1878.     3  vols. 
7. — Cox,    G.    W.,    and   Johns,    E.    H.,   Popular 

Romances  of  the  Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1880. 

2  vols. 
8. — Cunningham,  The  Growth  of  the  Church  in  its 

Organisation  and  Institutions.     Lond.,  1886. 
9. — Cutts,  E.   L.,  Scenes  and  Characters  of  the 

Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1872. 


Organisation,  Life,  and  Institutions    383 

10. — Dollinger,  J.  J.  I.,  Fables  Respecting  the  Popes 

of  the  Middle  Ages.     N.  Y.,  1872. 
11. — Hatch,  E.,  The  Growth  of  Church  Institutions.   ^V 

N.  Y.,  1887. 
12. — Lacroix,    P.,   Manners,  Customs,  and  Dress 
of  the  Middle  Ages.     Tr.  N.  Y.,  1874.     Mili- 
tary and  Religious  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages. 
Lond.,  1879.  t  ., 

Lea,  H.  C,  Studies  in  Church  History.     Phil.,         \ 
1869.     Superstition  and  Force.     Phil.,   1871. 
Sacerdotal  Celibacy.     Bost.,  1884.     Auricular 
Confession     and    Indulgences.     Phil.,     1896. 
3  vols. 
14. — Lecky,  W.  E.  H.,  European  Morals.     N.  Y., 

1877.     (To  9th  cent.) 
15. — Lewis,  Paganism  Surviving  in  Christianity. 

N.  Y.,  1892. 
16. — Maitland,   S.    R.,    The  Dark  Ages.     Lond., 

1845. 
17. — Marshall,  Penitential  Discipline  of  the  Prim- 
itive Church. 
18. — Poole,  R.  L.,  History  of  Medieval  Thought. 

Lond.,  1872. 
19. — Trench,  R.  C,  Lectures  on  Mediceval  Church 

History.     N.  Y.,  1878. 
20. — Walcott,  M.  E.  C,  Traditions  and  Customs  of 
Cathedrals.     Lond.,  1872. 
11. — general: 

Adams,  Civ.,  ch.  3.  Addis,  ch.  7.  Adeney,  ch. 
11,  12.  Alzog,  ii.,  111-118,  243-256,  257-292. 
Bouzique,  ii.,  ch.  2,  3.  Butler,  ch.  32,  33,  36-39, 
58,  60,  64.  Cheetham,  ch.  13.  Coxe,  lect.  1-4. 
Dollinger,  ii.,  ch.  5,  sec.  11-20;  iii.,  ch.  4,  sec.  2,  3, 
5,  7.  Fisher,  no,  155,  175.  Foulkes,  ch.  5-1 1. 
Gieseler,  ii.,  310,  318,  420,  431-446.  Gilmartin,  i., 
ch.  12-15,  36,  40.  Guericke,  sec.  76-80.  Kurtz, 
i.,  352-396,  496-514,  516-526.  Milman,  bk.  3,  ch. 
5.  Moeller,  ii.,  111-121,  210-221,  292-320,  321- 
345.  Neander,  ii.,  661-678;  iii.,  91-106,  123-141, 
425-456.  Pennington,  ch.  2.  Robertson,  ii.,  186- 
244,  493-546.  Schaff,  iv.,  326-355.  379-47°.  571" 
581,  621. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE  HOLY  ROMAN  EMPIRE  AND  THE  PAPACY 

Outlin  e  :  I . — Decline  of  the  Empire  under  the  later  Carolingians. 
II. — Preparations  to  restore  the  Empire  on  a  German  basis.  III. — 
Otto  the  Great  creates  the  Holy  Roman  Empire.  IV. — Holy 
Roman  Empire  attains  its  height  under  Henry  III.  V. — Results 
of  the  creation  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire.     VI. — Sources. 

THE  Empire  created  by  Charles  the  Great  rapidly 
declined  under  the  later  Carolingians.    The  causes 
for  this  dissolution  were: 

i.  The  principle  of  division  of  rule,  which  was  prac- 
tised before  the  time  of  Charles  the  Great,  and  endorsed 
^        by  him,  produced  five  divisions  of  the  Empire  within 
thirty   years.     This   was   fatal   to   stability  and   per- 
manency. 

2.  The  disintegration  of  the  Empire  into  national 
states  resulted  from  the  growing  differences  of  race, 
language,  institutions,  and  laws.1 

3.  Powerful  feudal  dukedoms  arose  such  as  Bavaria 
on  the  Danube,  the  barrier  against  the  East ;  Swabia  on 
the  upper  Danube  and  Rhine ;  Franconia  on  the  Rhine 
and  Main  north  of  Swabia ;  Saxony  on  the  Ems,  Weser, 
and  Elbe  north  of  Franconia;  Burgundy,  a  kingdom 
south-west  of  Swabia ;  Aquitania  in  southern  France ; 

•  See  Strassburg  oaths  (842),  and  treaties  of  Verdun  (843)  and 
Meersen  (870).  Given  in  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  16-19;  Ogg,  §24. 

25- 

384 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  385 

Brittany  in  north-western  France ;  Normandy  in  north- 
ern France;  and  others. 

4.  The  rulers  who  succeeded  Charles  the  Great  were, 
as  compared  with  him,  men  of  very  inferior  ability. 

5.  The  poor  roads  made  it  almost  impossible  to 
keep  in  touch  with  all  parts  of  the  wide  Empire.  The 
well-built  roads  of  the  Romans  had  generally  fallen 
into  decay,  simply  because  there  was  no  longer  a  corps 
of  trained  engineers  to  keep  them  up. 

6.  The  scarcity  of  money  likewise  prevented  the 
ruler  from  securing  the  services  of  a  great  body  of  able 
officers,  and  also  made  it  impossible  for  him  to  support 
a  standing  army  to  enforce  his  will  everywhere. 

7.  The  barbarian  invasions  from  the  east  and  the 
north  brought  in  the  Northmen,  Slavs,  and  the  Hun- 
garians, while  the  Saracens  were  attacking  Italy  and 
southern  France.1 

Before  the  ninth  century  closed,  the  territorial  unity 
of  the  Empire  of  Charles  the  Great  was  broken  up. 
Charles  the  Bald  (875-877)  ruled  France  as  king,  held 
Italy  as  Emperor,  and  sought  to  gain  control  of  Ger- 
many but  was  prevented  by  death  from  doing  so. 
Charles  the  Fat  (881-888)  held  Germany  as  king, 
controlled  Italy  as  Emperor,  and  was  invited  to 
assume  the  French  crown  because  Charles  the  Simple, 
a  weak-minded  boy  of  six,  could  not  cope  with  the 
marauding  Northmen.  Charles  the  Fat,  the  last 
legitimate  East  Frankish  male  descendant  of  Charles 
the  Great,  accepted  the  proffered  throne  (885)  and 
thus  reunited  all  the  parts  of  the  Empire  of  Charles  the 
Great  except  Burgundy.  But  Charles  the  Fat  was 
too  weak  to  hold   the   reins  of   government  over   so 

1  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  158  ff.;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  20,  21. 

25 


386     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


vast  an  area.  He  bought  off  the  Northmen  by  a  dis- 
graceful treaty  (886)  to  the  disgust  of  the  French, 
was  driven  out  of  Italy  (887),  and  then,  deposed  and 
deserted  by  his  German  subjects,  he  crawled  off  to  an 
unregrettable  death  on  his  Swabian  estates  (888). 1 
This  was  the  last  union  of  France  and  Germany  under 
one  ruler  until  Napoleon  the  Great  carved  out  his 
vast  Empire  in  western  Europe. 

When  the  line  of  the  Carolingian  rulers,  called, 
into  existence  by  papal  coronation  in  800,  ended 
with  the  death  of  the  last  legitimate  descendant  in  the 
male  line,  Charles  the  Fat,  in  888,  a  new  problem  con- 
fronted western  Europe.  The  right  of  appointing  a.. 
new  Emperor  reverted  to  Rome  and  the  Pope.  The 
Empire  of  Charles  the  Great  fell  asunder  and  from  it 
emerged  four  kingdoms.2  West  France  chose  Odo 
of  Eudes  as  king.  East  France,  or  Germany,  elected 
Arnulf.  The  kingdom  of  Burgundy  was  divided 
between  two  rival  rulers.  Italy,  except  the  southern 
part  which  was  still  loyal  to  Constantinople,  was  also 
divided  between  the  parties  of  Berengar  of  Friulis 
and  Guido  of  Spoleto.*  The  former  was  chosen  king 
by  the  estates  of  Lombardy,  the  latter  was  crowned 
Emperor  by  the  Pope  Stephen  VI.  and  not  long  after- 
wards, to  insure  the  permanency  of  the  imperial  title 
in  his  family,  had  his  son  Lambert  crowned  co-Emperor 
in  894  by  Pope  Formosus.5 

»  Pertz,  i.,  405. 

2  See  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  22. 

3  He  was  a  great-grandson  of  Charles  the  Great  through  his 
mother  Gisela,  a  daughter  of  Louis  the  Pious. 

*  He  was  by  birth  a  Neustrian  Frank  and  also  claimed  descent 
from  Charles  the  Great.  He  had  large  estates  in  Lorraine  as  well  as 
central  Italy. 

t  Pope    Formosus    had    a    rather    checkered    career.     He  was 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  387 


Of  all  the  various  knights  who  appeared  in  different 
parts  of  the  Empire  immediately  after  888,  the  strongest 
and  most  able  was  Arnulf ,  a  bastard  nephew  of  Charles 
the  Fat,  but  a  warrior  of  renown,  who  was  raised  on  the 
East  Frankish  throne  by  the  disgusted  nobles  in  888. 
A  descendant  of  Charles  the  Great,  he  was,  for  a  very 
brief  period,  looked  upon  as  the  head  of  the  Carolingian 
Empire.  Odo  of  Eudes,  the  Count  of  Paris,  placed 
his  royal  crown  in  the  hands  of  Arnulf  and  received 
it  back  as  a  royal  vassal.  Berengar  of  Italy  also  did 
homage  to  Arnulf  and  received  his  kingdom  as  a  fief. 
Soon,  however,  local  kings  set  up  by  the  people  arose 
and  Arnulf  restricted  his  rule  to  Germany  and  Italy.1 
He  defeated  the  predatory  Northmen,  checked  the 
inroads  of  the  warlike  Magyars,  and  by  storming 
Rome  compelled  the  Corsican  Pope  Formosus  to  crown 
him  as  Emperor  (896).2  Then  he  turned  his  attention 
to  the  boy  Emperor  in  Italy,  the  Duke  of  Spoleto, 
but  was  smitten  by  disease  and  hastened  back  to 
Germany  (d.  8 9 9). 3  Italy  was  thus  left  to  sixty 
years  of  tumult  and  anarchy.  With  the  death  of  his 
son,  Louis  the  Child,  in  911,  the  Carolingian  dynasty 
passed  away  in  Germany.  In  987  the  powerful  French 
barons  set  aside  the  Carolingian  heir  and  elected  Hugh 
Capet,  the  Duke  of  France,  as  king  of  the  feudal 
monarchy  and  the  Archbishop  of  Rheims  crowned  him.  4 
The  Carolingian  Empire  was  at  an  end.     For  more  than 

Bishop  of  Porto  and  papal  legate.  John  VIII.  had  excommunicated 
him  for  political  motives.  Marinus  restored  him  to  power.  He 
was  the  first  Pope  to  be  elevated  from  another  see  to  that  of  Rome. 
Moeller,  ii.,  172. 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  22. 

2  Ibid.,  No.  23. 

3  Emerton,  Med.  Europe,  94. 

4  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  195;   Ogg,  §29 


388     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


half  a  century  now  the  imperial  crown  was  a  reward 
in  the  Pope's  hands  to  be  bestowed  upon  this  or  that 
Italian  noble  for  "value  received."1 

The  first  half  of  the  tenth  century  seemed  to  be  the 
very  nadir  of  political  order  and  conscious  culture. 
It  is  almost  impossible  for  a  modern  mind  to  compre- 
hend the  torrents  of  barbaric  destruction  sweeping 
in  over  western  Europe  from  all  sides.  As  compared 
with  the  Teutonic  invasion  of  the  Roman  Empire  five 
centuries  before,  the  onslaught  was  more  sudden  and 
fiercer  while  the  internal  resistance  was  much  more 
poorly  organised  and  consequently  weaker.  For  several 
centuries  these  forces  had  been  gathering.  Charles  the 
Great  had  held  the  torrent  in  check.  But  not  long  after 
the  dissolution  of  his  Empire  the  onslaught  began. 
The  merciless  Saracens  roamed  the  Mediterranean 
Sea  as  its  masters,  laid  waste  the  Christian  seacoast 
towns,  and  even  sacked  Rome  itself,  the  seat  of  Empire 
and  Christian  rule.  The  Danes  and  Northmen  swept 
the  North  Sea,  the  English  Channel,  the  Atlantic 
coast,  and  pierced  France  and  Germany  by  their 
rivers,  almost  to  the  heart,  killing,  robbing,  and  taking 
captives.  They  even  boldly  passed  Gibraltar  into  the 
Mediterranean  and  fell  upon  Provence  and  Italy,  where 
they  left  an  indelible  impression. 

Meantime  on  land  the  Slavic  barbarians,  the  Wends, 
the  Czechs,  and  the  Obotrites,  rebelled  against  the 
German  yoke  and  threatened  the  whole  north-eastern 
border  of  the  Empire.  Behind  them  were  the  Poles 
and  Russians.  Farther  south  came  the  unruly  Hun- 
garian tribes  which  "dashed  over  Germany  like  the 
flying  spray  of  a  new  wave  of  barbarism,  and  carried 

1  Bryce,  Holy  Rom.  Emp.,  ch.  6,  p.  83. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  389 


the  terror  of  the  battle-axes  to  the  Apennines  and  the 
ocean."1  These  blows  from  all  sides  knocked  out 
the  foundations  of  the  imperial  structure,  already- 
weakened  to  the  point  of  dissolution  by  internal  decay, 
and  it  fell.  As  a  result  reliance  for  protection  on  a 
common  defence  and  imperial  organisation  was  aban- 
doned. Feudalism  replaced  the  Empire.  The  strong 
built  fortress  castles,  the  weak  became  their  vassals. 
Local  authorities — counts,  dukes,  lords,  bishops,  and 
abbots — saw  new  duties  and  new  opportunities.  They 
took  a  firmer  hold,  converted  a  delegated  into  an 
independent  power,  a  personal  into  a  territorial 
jurisdiction.  Recognition  of  a  distant,  weak  imperial 
or  royal  authority  was  only  nominal  and  feeble  at  that. 
The  grand  dream  of  a  mighty,  universal  Christian 
Empire  was  being  rapidly  lost  in  the  decentralising 
forces,  and  in  the  increasing  localisation  of  all  powers. 
During  this  period  of  weakness  and  confusion,  the 
mediaeval  Church,  instead  of  standing  forth  as  the 
source  of  strength  and  intelligence,  instead  of  making 
further  gains  of  a  political  and  ecclesiastical  character 
for  the  See  of  St.  Peter,  seemed  to  fall  into  "a  death- 
sleep  of  moral  and  spiritual  exhaustion."2  The 
Papacy  as  a  religious  organisation  almost  disappears 
from  view.  The  commanding  spirits  of  Gregory  the 
Great  and  of  Nicholas  the  Great  were  utterly  forgotten. 
The  victories  gained  through  the  Pseudo-Isidorian 
Decretals  were  not  followed  up.  A  really  great  Pope 
at  this  time  might  easily  have  realised  all  the  dreams 
of  Innocent  III.,  but  none  such  wore  the  papal  tiara. 
With  the  death  of  Louis  the  Child  (911),  Germany 


1  Bryce,  Holy  Rom.  Emp.,  79. 

2  Greenwood,  bk.  viii.,  ch.  1. 


39°     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


was  confronted  by  a  serious  problem.1  Would  the 
powerful  German  dukes  set  up  independent  kingdoms  ? 
Or  would  they  invite  Charles  the  Simple,  the  genuine 
Carolingian  sovereign  of  France,  to  include  Germany  in 
a  reunited  Frankish  empire?  Or  would  they  create  a 
German  monarchy  on  an  independent  basis?  The 
German  nobles  met  at  Forchheim  to  consider  the  situa- 
tion. Charles  the  Simple  was  not  even  thought  of — a 
significant  fact,  because  it  showed  that  the  imperial  idea 
was  at  a  low  ebb  in  Germany.  The  instinct  of  nation- 
ality was  beginning  to  be  felt.  The  nobles  urged  the 
beloved  and  honoured  old  Duke  of  Saxony,  Otto, 
to  accept  the  crown  of  a  feudal  monarchy,  but  he 
declined  and  urged  the  election  of  Conrad  of  Franconia. 
Conrad  accepted  the  responsible  honour  and  was 
crowned  and  anointed  by  the  Archbishop  of  Mainz 
without  reference  to  the  papal  power.  His  reign 
(91 1-9 1 8)  was  filled  with  wars  against  the  powerful 
dukes  who  objected  to  the  rigid  enforcement  of  his 
royal  rights  and  the  consequent  curtailment  of  their 
prerogatives,  The  clergy,  on  the  contrary,  upheld  the 
king  because  they  clearly  saw  that  their  interests 
would  be  best  cared  for  by  a  simple,  strong  government. 
When  Conrad  died  (918)  he  had  made  little  head- 
way toward  the  creation  of  a  powerful  centralised 
monarchy.2 

The  nobles  of  Saxony  and  Franconia  met  in  919 
and  chose  Henry,  the  son  of  Conrad,  Duke  of  Saxony, 
as  king  (9 1 9-93 6). 3  To  the  Archbishop  of  Mainz,  who 
wanted  to  crown  him,  Henry  said:  "Enough  for  me 
that  I  am  raised  so  far  above  my  sires  as  to  be  chosen 

1  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  245. 

2  Saxon  Chronicle,  quoted  in  Emerton,  Med.  Europe,  102. 
*  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  247. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  39: 


and  called  king  through  the  grace  of  God  and  your 
devotion  ;  let  the  sacred  unction  and  crown  be  for  better 
men  than  I."  Had  he  seen  too  much  of  kings  crowned 
and  ruled  by  priests?  At  least  his  action  pleased  the 
whole  assembly.  By  wise  concessions  he  forced  Swabia 
and  Bavaria  to  accept  him  as  king  and  rewon  Lorraine 
as  a  part  of  the  German  kingdom.  He  thrust  back 
the  terrible  Magyars,  conquered  the  Danes,  and 
humbled  the  Bohemians.  He  reformed  and  reorganised 
the  military  system  and  protected  the  kingdom  by 
building  fortified  towns  along  the  northern  and  eastern 
frontiers.  When  he  died  all  the  German  people  were 
under  one  rule,  peace  reigned  throughout  the  kingdom, 
feudalism  had  received  a  check,  trade  was  flourishing, 
the  position  of  the  freemen  was  improved,  and  the 
German  kingdom  had  been  established  on  a  firm  basis 
independent  of  the  Empire.  But  death  alone,  perhaps, 
prevented  him  from  claiming  the  imperial  crown.1 

Under  Otto  the  Great,  however,  the  old  Empire  was 
to  revive  and  become  very  active,  but  on  a  German 
foundation.  The  traditions  of  the  Carolingian  house, 
the  Italian  puppet  Emperors,  the  Papacy,  and  the  law, 
philosophy,  theology,  and  education  of  the  day  all  helped 
to  keep  the  idea  of  Empire  alive.2  Otto,  born  in  912, 
was  the  son  of  the  Saxon  king  Henry  I.  and  Matilda, 
who  traced  her  descent  to  Charles  the  Great.  He 
spent  his  youth  at  the  court  and  in  the  wars  of  his 
father,  and  was  regarded  as  haughty,  overbearing,  and 
ambitious.  He  married  Edith,  the  daughter  of  the 
King  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  (929). 

When  Henry  I.  died  in  936  the  nobles  and  bishops 
met   at   Aachen    in   the   old   cathedral   and    formally 

1  Bryce,  Holy  Rom.  Emp.,  77;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  26. 

2  Bryce,  Holy  Rom.  Emp.,  ch.  7. 


392      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


elected  Otto  I.  as  King  of  Germany.  As  Otto  entered 
the  cathedral  a  few  weeks  later  to  be  coronated  the 
Archbishop  of  Mainz  cried  out:  "The  man  chosen  by- 
God,  nominated  by  our  master  Henry,  and  declared 
king  by  all  the  princes."  He  was  then  crowned, 
anointed,  and  girded  with  the  royal  sword  by  the 
Archbishop.  In  the  coronation  festival  that  followed 
the  German  dukes  for  the  first  time  acted  as  the 
king's  servants.  The  coronation  was  very  significant 
because  it  showed  Otto's  attitude  toward  the  Church, 
indicated  the  lofty  position  of  the  royal  crown  and 
the  subjection  of  the  dukes,  revealed  the  possibility  of 
a  strong,  united  German  kingdom  under  right  manage- 
ment, and  proved  the  popularity  and  opportunity  of 
Otto  I.  as  King  of  the  Germans.1 

Otto  took  Charles  the  Great  as  his  model  and  sought 
to  transform  the  loose  federal  state  of  his  father  into 
a  strong,  compact  monarchy  by  reducing  the  power 
of  his  vassals.  By  quelling  the  various  rebellious 
dukes  Otto  made  them  his  own  appointees,  and  was 
recognised  as  the  master  of  the  German  nation.  The 
name  "Deutsch"  began  to  be  applied  to  his  subjects 
and  their  tongue.  He  manifested  no  less  activity 
in  foreign  affairs  as  is  shown  in  his  invasion  of  France 
to  compel  homage  from  Hugh  the  Great,  his  son-in- 
law  ;  in  his  conquest  of  the  Slavs  between  the  Elbe  and 
the  Oder ;  and  in  his  reduction  of  the  unstable  Danes  to 
submission. 

Otto  was  ready  now  to  give  his  attention  to  Italian 
affairs.  Adelaide,  the  beautiful  young  widow  of  the 
son  of  King  Hugh  of  Provence,  had  refused  to  marry 
Adalbert,  the  son  of  Berengar  II.,  King  of  Lombardy, 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  27;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  249. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  393 


hence  was  cast  into  prison  and  cruelly  treated.  She 
escaped  with  the  aid  of  the  Bishop  of  Reggio  and  ap- 
pealed to  the  mighty  German  sovereign  for  deliverance.1 
Otto,  touched  with  chivalrous  sympathy,  and  seeing 
an  opening  for  the  realisation  of  imperial  ambitions, 
marched  with  a  great  force  into  Lombardy  (951). 
Berengar  was  forced  to  hold  his  kingdom  as  a  vassal  of 
the  German  crown.  Otto,  a  widower  at  this  time, 
then  married  his  fair  protegee.  Civil  war  in  Germany 
compelled  him  to  give  up  his  journey  to  Rome,  how- 
ever, and  instead  to  return  home.  Otto's  son,  Ludolph, 
who  feared  that  his  father's  recent  marriage  with  the 
fair  widow  might  deprive  him  of  the  German  crown, 
plotted  with  the  old  Archbishop  of  Mainz  and  dis- 
contented German  nobles,  to  secure  the  throne.  The 
resulting  war  involved  the  whole  kingdom  and  shook 
Otto's  power  and  ability  to  the  roots.  The  approach 
of  a  common  foe,  however,  the  terrible  Magyars,  led  the 
nation  to  rally  around  Otto.  In  the  decisive  battle 
of  Lechfeld  (955)  the  Huns  were  effectively  checked 
and  began  to  settle  the  lands  which  they  still  occupy.2 
Otto  was  now  unquestionably  the  most  powerful 
monarch  in  Europe.  Such  rulers  as  Louis  IV.  of 
France  and  the  King  of  Burgundy  sought  his  friendship 
and  aid.  His  own  people  began  to  call  him  "The 
Great." 

The  way  seemed  to  be  open  at  last  for  the  realisation 
of  Otto's  imperial  dreams.  He  was  a  descendant  of 
Charles  the  Great  in  the  female  line.  He  was  the 
complete  master  of  a  large  part  of  the  Empire  with  the 
northern  capital  in  it.  He  had  already  taken  the 
crown  of  Lombardy.     On  the  battlefield  of  Lechfeld 

1  Pertz,  iv.,  328,  330. 

2  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  28. 


394     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


{955)  his  victorious  troops  saluted  him  as  "Imperator 
Augustus,  Pater  Patrse."  1  He  had  likewise  proved 
himself  a  most  worthy  champion  of  the  Church  by 
allowing  the  Church  to  crown  him;  by  enriching  the 
German  Church,  giving  it  a  better  organisation,  and 
subjecting  it  to  his  will;  and  by  labouring  zealously 
to  convert  the  heathen  on  his  borders.2 

Italian  affairs  called  him  thither  a  second  time. 
Berengar  after  recovering  his  throne  was  ruling  as  a 
tyrant  in  the  north  and  had  violated  a  portion  of  the 
patrimony  of  St.  Peter.  Mohammedan  corsairs  were 
devastating  the  south.  The  rest  of  Italy  was  full 
of  anarchy  and  desolated  by  the  feuds  of  a  crowd  of 
petty  nobles  most  of  whom  were  scrambling  for  the 
imperial  crown.  A  row  of  inferior  Popes  had  brought 
the  Papacy  itself  into  disrepute.  Thus  the  solicitations 
of  his  family,  the  approval  of  his  people  and  nobles, 
the  cry  of  the  oppressed  Italians,  the  expectation  of 
the  nobility,  and  the  request  of  Pope  John  XII.  and 
influential  churchmen,  all  impelled  him  to  realise  his 
own  wish. 

Therefore,  in  957,  Otto  sent  Ludolph  with  a  large 
force  against  Berengar.  The  Crown  Prince  died  in  the 
midst  of  victory.  Then  Otto  had  his  little  son  crowned 
as  Otto  II.  in  961  and  crossed  the  Alps  with  a  big  army. 
All  resistance  vanished  before  this  new  Charles  the 
Great.  In  a  general  diet  of  the  Lombard  kingdom 
Berengar  was  deposed  and  at  Pa  via  the  German  mon- 
arch was  formally  crowned  "King  of  Italy."  Early  in 
962  he  triumphantly  entered  the  Eternal  City.  The 
Pope  gave  him  hearty  greeting,  held  services  of  thanks- 
giving, and  gave  a  great  feast  in  his  honour.     On  the 

1  Pertz,  iii. ,  459. 

2  Hauck,  Kircheng.  Deutschl.,  i.,  69. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  395 


following  Sunday  the  imperial  coronation  occurred  in 
the  church  of  St.  John  Lateran.1  The  King  promised 
to  protect  and  defend  the  Church  2 ;  the  Pope  to  be  an 
obedient  subject  of  the  Emperor;  and  the  people  to 
choose  no  future  Pope  without  Otto's  consent.  Otto 
was  then  anointed  by  the  Pope,  the  imperial  crown  was 
put  on  his  brow,  the  imperial  robe  was  adjusted,  and 
the  imperial  sword  was  buckled  on  while  the  populace 
shouted  "Long  live  Otto,  Emperor  Augustus."  The 
head  of  that  race  which  Charles  the  Great  had  converted 
by  the  sword  had  revived  the  Empire,  the  policy,  and 
the  traditions  of  that  renowned  ruler. 

The  papal  policy  of  Emperor  Otto  I.  was  soon  revealed. 
He  granted  to  the  Church  the  most  famous  and  the  most 
important  "constitution  "  since  that  of  Lothair  (824)  in 
which  all  the  grants  of  Pepin,  Charles  the  Great,  and 
Louis  the  Pious  were  confirmed  and  the  rights  of  the 
Emperor  in  papal  elections  clearly  defined.3  Otto  had 
no  sooner  reached  northern  Italy  to  subdue  the  irre- 
pressible Berengar  and  his  sons,  however,  than  Pope 
John  renounced  his  allegiance  to  his  new  master,  con- 
spired with  Berengar,  and  even  incited  the  heathen 
Magyars  to  invade  Germany.4  The  Emperor  refused 
to  believe  these  plots  until  confirmed  by  his  own 
messengers  and  even  then  excused  the  young  Pontiff 
by  remarking:  "He  is  only  a  boy;  the  example  of 
good  men  will  reform  him."  s  He  then  hastened  to 
Rome  to  begin  that  work. 

1  Bryce,  88.  Fisher,  Med.  Emp.,  i.;  Thatcher  and  McNeal, 
No.  29. 

2  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  53. 

3  Mon.  Ger.  Hist.  Leges,  ii.,  177;  Watterich,  i.,  675;  Thatcher 
and  McNeal,  No.  54. 

♦  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  253. 
5  Luitprand,  Hist.  Ottonis.  ch.  5. 


396      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Pope  John  at  once  sent  legates  to  Otto  promising 
amendment  and  accusing  the  Emperor  of  having 
broken  his  solemn  promise.  Otto  excused  his  actions 
and,  after  the  custom  of  the  age,  challenged  the  Pope 
to  settle  the  dispute  either  by  the  wager  of  a  solemn 
oath  or  by  the  ordeal  of  battle.  Both  offers  were 
refused  and  Otto  took  Rome.  John  "seized  most  of 
the  treasures  of  St.  Peter  and  sought  safety  in  flight."  l 
Otto,  at  the  request  of  the  Roman  clergy  and  people, 
called  an  ecclesiastical  council  in  St.  Peter's  to  try  him 
(963).  John  XII.  was  proved  guilty  of  the  whole 
category  of  mediaeval  crimes:  celebrating  mass  without 
communing  himself,  ordaining  a  bishop  in  a  stable, 
accepting  bribes  for  ordination,  consecrating  a  ten- 
year-old  bishop,  neglecting  the  repair  of  churches, 
being  guilty  of  adultery  and  incest,  making  the  Lateran 
a  brothel,  going  out  hunting  with  the  nobles,  putting 
out  the  eyes  of  his  own  godfather,  Benedict,  cruelly 
murdering  the  archdeacon  John,  setting  fire  to  houses 
like  Nero,  wearing  the  armour  of  a  warrior  in  Rome, 
drinking  to  the  devil's  health,  neglecting  matins  and 
vespers,  never  signing  himself  with  the  cross,  and  even 
invoking  the  aid  of  Venus,  Jupiter,  and  other  demons 
when  gambling. 

Thrice  John  was  summoned  to  appear  before  the 
council  in  order  to  clear  himself  of  the  charges.  At 
the  request  of  the  council  the  Emperor  wrote  a  letter 
addressed  to  the  "Pontiff  and  Universal  Pope  John" 
asking  him  to  appear : 

Having  arrived  in  Rome  on  the  service  of  God,  and 
having  inquired  of  your  sons  the  bishops  and  clergy, 
and  of  the  people  of  your  Church,  why  you  have  forsaken 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  29. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  397 


them,  such  scandalous  and  obscene  things  have  been 
reported  to  us  concerning  you,  that  if  the  like  had  been 
told  us  of  a  common  mountebank  we  should  have  hesitated 
to  repeat  them.  But  that  you  may  not  be  wholly  ignorant 
of  what  it  is  that  is  said  of  you,  we  will  specify  a  few  of  these 
things  only;  for  if  we  would  enumerate  all,  the  daylight 
would  fail  before  we  would  make  an  end  of  writing.  Know, 
then,  that  you  are  accused — not  by  individuals  but  by 
the  unanimous  voice  of  clergy  and  laity — of  homicide, 
sacrilege,  perjury,  and  incest.  It  is  also  said  of  you,  that 
in  your  sports  you  have  called  upon  the  names  of  Jupiter, 
Venus,  and  other  demons  of  the  old  world.  We  therefore 
do  earnestly  entreat  your  paternity  that  you  delay  not  to 
return  to  Rome,  and  to  purge  yourself  from  these  heinous 
crimes,  and  if  perchance  you  should  stand  in  fear  of  the 
rude  multitude,  we  are  ready  to  pledge  our  oath  that 
nothing  contrary  to  canonical  rule  and  order  shall  be  done 
against  you.1 

But  the  fiery  young  Pope  contemptuously  replied: 
4  'John,  bishop,  the  servant  of  all  the  servants  of  God, 
to  all  the  bishops :  We  hear  that  you  design  to  elect  a 
new  Pope.  If  you  do,  in  the  name  of  Almighty  God  I 
excommunicate  you  and  forbid  you  to  confer  orders  or 
to  celebrate  mass."  In  a  spicy  answer  Otto  asked  John 
to  mend  both  his  Latin  and  his  morals,  and  promised 
him  a  safe  conduct  to  the  council,  but  "the  Pope  was 
gone  out  hunting"  and  did  not  receive  it.  The  council 
then  formally  deposed  John  as  a  "monster  of  iniquity" 
and  unanimously  chose  the  papal  secretary,  a  layman, 
as  Pope  Leo  VIII.2  Thus  the  new  Emperor  had 
deposed  one  Pope,  by  what  must  certainly  be  pro- 

1  Greenwood,  bk.  viii.,  477;  Gregorovius,  Rome  in  M.  A.,  bk.  vi., 
346. 
Th  cather  and  McJNeal,  No.  55. 


398     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


nounced  an  illegal  method,  and  had  elected  another — 
a  power  never  claimed  by  Charles  the  Great.1  This, 
apparently,  was  Otto's  interpretation  of  his  oath  to 
protect  the  Holy  See.  The  ancient  relation  of  the 
Empire  to  the  Papacy  was  thus  re-established. 

The  Romans,  fickle  as  usual,  soon  wearied  of  a 
German  yoke,  and,  at  a  favourable  opportunity,  broke 
out  in  furious  rebellion  against  the  Emperor  and  his 
Pope,  but  were  subdued  with  terrible  revenge.  When 
at  length  Otto  left  Rome  to  capture  Berengar's  son 
Adalbert,  they  at  once  attacked  the  defenceless  Pope 
and  recalled  John  XII.,  who  wreaked  sweet  and  cruel 
vengeance  on  the  leaders  of  the  imperial  faction.  An 
obsequious  synod  reversed  all  the  decrees  of  deposition. 
When  John  XII.  was  killed  in  crime,  the  Romans, 
without  consulting  the  Emperor  as  they  had  promised, 
at  once  elected  Pope  Benedict  V.  Once  more  Otto 
appeared  before  Rome  with  a  huge  army  to  assert  his 
rights  and  to  enforce  his  policy.  The  city  surrendered, 
the  new  Pope  begged  for  mercy,  and  was  banished  to 
Germany.  Leo  VIII.  was  recalled.  "When  I  drop 
my  sword,  I  will  drop  Leo,"  boasted  the  Emperor. 
The  Emperor's  sword  had  come  to  be  the  basis  of  papal 
power.  A  Church  council  was  summoned  and  declared 
that  the  Emperor  had  a  full  right  to  the  kingdom  of 
Italy,  that  he  could  name  his  successor,  and  that  the 
election  of  a  Pope  must  accord  with  his  will.  After  that 
great  victory  Otto  returned  to  Germany,  where  his 
approval  was  soon  asked  for  the  election  of  Leo 
VIII. 's  successor,  the  respectable  John  XIII.  Again 
the  customary  rebellion  against  the  new  occupant  of 
St.  Peter's  chair  recalled  Otto  to  Rome.     There  he 

i  Greenwood,  bk.  viii.,  483. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  399 


remained  five  years  and  won  a  distinct  victory  for  both 
his  papal,  and  his  imperial  policy. 

Otto's  foreign  policy  as  Emperor  was  not  unlike  that 
of  his  great  predecessor,  Charles  the  Great,  and  his 
renowned  successor,  Napoleon  the  Great,  namely,  to 
unite  the  East  and  the  West.  The  hand  of  an  eastern 
princess  was  wooed  for  himself  but  without  success.  * 
His  son  proved  a  better  lover  and  married  the  ambi- 
tious Theophano  (972). 2  The  Empire  was  extended 
by  conquests.  Lotharingia  was  won  without  war. 
The  restoration  of  the  West  Franks  to  the  Empire 
was  attempted.  Burgundy  became  a  vassal  kingdom. 3 
The  Danes,  Slavs,  and  Magyars  were  held  in  subjuga- 
tion. An  effort  was  made  by  Otto  to  extend  his  sway 
over  southern  Italy. 

Like  Charles  the  Great,  Otto  gave  considerable  at- 
tention to  education.  Germany,  at  that  time  being 
on  the  frontier,  was  inferior  in  culture  to  Italy,  Spain, 
France ,  and  England .  Otto ,  who  knew  the  Frankish  and 
Slavic  dialects,  attempted  to  learn  Latin  late  in  life. 
He  attracted  a  number  of  educated  men  and  celebrated 
wits  to  his  court  such  as  Widukind,  the  historian  j 
Ratherius,  the  theologian;  Luitprand,  the  humourist 
and  diplomat;  Gerbert,  the  omniscient  scholar;  Arch- 
bishop Bruno,  Otto's  brother  and  a  great  classical 
scholar;  and  John  of  Gorz,  the  grammarian  and  Bible 
student.4  Learning  was  not  appreciated,  however, 
and  these  scholars  were  looked  upon  with  jealousy 
and  suspicion.5 

1  Henderson,  Select.  Hist.  Docs.,  442,  gives  the  highly  amusing 
account  of  the  ambassador  Luitprand. 

*  Bryce,  ch.  9. 

8  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  30,  31. 

*  Maitland,  Dark  Ages,  499. 

*  Hauck,  iii.,  333.     Archbishop   Bruno  was  thought  to   be   in 


4oo     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  resemblances  and  differences  between  Otto  the 
Great  and  Charles  the  Great  were  very  striking.  Both 
were  Teutons — one  a  Frank,  the  other  a  Saxon.  Both 
as  kings  carved  out  the  foundations  for  an  Empire 
with  the  sword.  Both  were  coronated  as  Emperor 
at  Rome  by  the  Pope  and  posed  as  champions  of  the 
Church.  Both  assumed  the  Italian  crown.  Both  used 
the  same  method  in  propagating  Christianity  among 
the  heathen  on  their  borders.  Both  assumed  the 
right  to  rule  the  Church  from  Pope  to  priest.  Both 
subjected  the  powerful  nobles  and  established  an 
absolute,  personal  government,  though  Otto's  position 
in  Germany  and  Europe  was  less  commanding  and 
less  autocratic  than  his  predecessor's.  Both  produced 
an  intellectual  renascence.  Both  deserve  to  be  called 
the  "Great."  But  neither  their  kingdoms  nor  their 
Empires  were  coterminous,  though  their  capitals  were 
identical,  namely,  Rome  and  Aachen.  Otto's  Empire 
was  founded  on  narrower  geographical  limits,  hence  had 
a  less  plausible  claim  to  be  the  heir  of  Rome's  universal 
dominion.  Charles  tried  one  Pope,  while  Otto  deposed 
two  and  had  his  own  candidates  elected.  Otto  took 
more  pains  to  preserve  his  Empire  than  Charles. 
Otto's  Empire  was  less  ecclesiastical  and  also  less 
Roman.  Charles  ruled  all  the  Franks  and  Italy, 
Otto  only  the  Eastern  Franks  and  Italy.  Charles 
ruled  over  Latin  Christendom,  while  Otto  only  a 
portion  of  it.  Charles   was   head  of  the  "heerban"; 

league  with  the  devil.  William  of  Hirschati  wrote  an  elaborate  apol- 
ogy for  classical  learning  as  an  appendix  to  his  work  on  astronomy. 
The  trick  played  by  Henry  II.  on  Bishon  Meinwerk  of  Paderborn 
illustrates  the  prevailing  ignorance  of  Latin.  Henry  II.  had  "fa" 
erased  from  the  mass  for  the  dead.  The  Bishop  did  not  understand 
Latin  so  offered  up  a  pra~er  for  he  and  she  mules. — Fisher, 
Med.  Emp.,  ii.,  90. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  401 


Otto  of  a  feudal  state.  Otto  produced  no  great 
capitularies  like  Charles.  Otto's  Empire  was  less 
splendid,  but  more  peaceful,  prosperous,  and  lasting, 
because  placed  on  a  better  social  basis.  Otto's  own 
life  and  court  were  on  a  far  loftier  plane  than  was  true 
of  Charles,  yet  Charles  was  both  the  greater  warrior 
and  the  greater  statesman.  The  Roman  Empire  of 
Charles  after  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  was  revised 
as  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  of  Otto.  The  latter  was 
substantially  as  well  as  technically  the  continuation 
of  the  former. 

Otto  I.,  before  making  his  journey  to  Rome  in  961, 
had  his  son  Otto  II.  crowned  King-  of  Germany  at 
Aachen.1  Six  years  later  (967)  he  was  coronated  at 
Rome  as  Emperor.  He  was  educated  by  Ekkehard  of 
St.  Gall,  the  court  chaplain,  in  literature,  history,  and 
science,  and  by  Count  Huodo  in  knightly  accomplish- 
ments. For  the  age  his  moral  character  was  excep- 
tionally high  and  he  possessed  refined,  scholarly  tastes. 
In  971  he  married  Theophano,  a  royal  princess  of  the 
Eastern  Empire.2  When  Otto  I.  died  in  973  in  the 
Saxon  monastery  at  Memleben,  Otto  II.,  at  the  age  of 
eighteen,  became  sole  king  and  Emperor  for  ten  years. 

Otto  II.  continued  his  father's  domestic  policy 
of  breaking  down  the  power  of  the  German  dukes. 
In  foreign  affairs  he  subdued  the  rebellious  Danes 
(974),  held  the  Bohemians  in  check,  invaded  France 
and  took  Lorraine  (978),  subjected  Poland  to  German 
rule  (979),  and  attempted  to  drive  the  Greeks  and 
Saracens  out  of  southern  Italy ;  but  his  early  death 
prevented  the  fulfilling  of  his  threat  to  reunite  Sicily 
with  the  Empire. 

1  Uhlriz,  Otto  II.  und  Otto  III.;  Jahrb.  d.  Deutsch.  Reiches. 

2  Bryce,  ch.  9;  Henderson,  442. 
26 


402     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


His  papal  policy  was  a  continuation  of  that  of  his 
father.  When  the  papal  usurper  Boniface  VII.  im- 
prisoned and  strangled  Pope  John  XIII.  and  then 
fled  with  the  Church  treasures  to  Constantinople  (974), 
young  Otto  set  Benedict  VII.  on  the  chair  of  St. 
Peter  and  assured  him  a  quiet  reign  for  nine  years. 
Upon  the  Pope's  death  (983)  the  youthful  Emperor 
elevated  the  Bishop  of  Pavia  to  the  papal  throne  as 
John  XIV.  When  Otto  II.  died  at  the  premature 
age  of  twenty-eight  in  Verona  after  "a  short  and 
troubled  reign,"1  Boniface  VII.  returned  from  the 
East  to  Rome,  murdered  the  Pope,  and  reassumed  the 
papal  tiara  unresisted.  The  usurper  died  in  eleven 
months,  however,  and  then  the  cowardly  Romans 
avenged  themselves  on  his  dead  body.2 

Otto  II.  left  behind  him  a  son  of  three  and  a  very 
active  widow.  The  young  heir  to  the  honours  and 
burdens  of  the  German  crown  and  to  the  imperial  throne 
likewise  had  his  mind  filled  with  the  glorious  history  of 
Greece  and  the  Eastern  Empire  by  his  Grecian  mother. 
John  the  Greek  inspired  within  him  a  love  for  the 
classics.  Bernard,  a  German  monk,  gave  him  a 
monastic  education  which  showed  itself  during  the 
remainder  of  his  life.  Gerbert,  a  Clugniac  monk, 
the  greatest  scholar  of  his  day,  taught  him  history, 
literature,  rhetoric,  and  science,  and  fired  him  with  a 
holy,  ascetic  zeal  to  become  a  great,  just  Christian 
Emperor. 

During  Otto  III.'s  minority  (983-996)  the  government 
was  wielded  by  his  mother  Theophano  (984-991)  and 
his  grandmother  Adelaid   (991-996).     At  the  age  of 

»  He  was  buried  in  St.  Peter's  and  is  the  only  German  Emperor 
sleeping  on  Roman  soil. 

2  Milman,  Lot.  Christ.,  iii.,  189;  Greenwood,  bk.  viii.,  497. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  403 

sixteen  the  last  of  the  Ottomans,  half  Saxon  and  . 
half  Greek,  the  plaything  of  women,  scholars,  and 
monks,  the  pious  young  dreamer  of  a  world  Empire, 
started  for  Rome  to  be  crowned  Emperor  (996) .  His 
father  had  had  him  elected  king  at  Verona  in  983 
and  coronated  at  Aachen.  On  his  way  now  to  the 
Eternal  City,  accompanied  by  a  coterie  of  German 
nobles  and  churchmen,  he  stopped  at  Pavia  to  receive 
the  homage  of  the  Lombard  princes.  At  Ravenna  a 
messenger  from  the  Roman  clergy,  senate,  and  people 
announced  the  death  of  Pope  John  XV.  and  asked 
Otto  to  name  a  successor — a  very  significant  fact. 
The  young  ruler  appointed  his  cousin  and  court 
chaplain,  Bruno,  who  became  the  first  German  Pope. 
Bruno  was  only  twenty-four,  but  noted  for  his  piety, 
austere  morals,  and  fiery  temper.  He  hastened  to 
Rome  and  was  installed  with  great  joy  as  Gregory 
V.  "The  news  that  a  scion  of  the  imperial  house,  a 
man  of  holiness,  of  wisdom  and  virtue,  is  placed  upon 
the  chair  of  Peter,"  wrote  Abbo  of  Fleury  to  a  friend, 
"is  news  more  precious  than  gold  and  costly  stones."  l 
This  was  the  first  instance  where  a  northerner,  a 
German,  was  elevated  to  the  See  of  St.  Peter.  A  few 
weeks  after  the  papal  coronation  Otto  entered  Rome 
and  received  the  imperial  crown  from  the  youthful 
Pontiff.  He  held  a  council  to  settle  Church  affairs  and 
called  a  diet  of  civil  authorities  to  settle  the  government 
and  then  returned  to  Germany. 

Within  a  year,  however,  a  rebellion  in  Rome  against 
Gregory  V.  recalled  Otto  III.  (997).  The  Pope  had 
fled  to  Pavia,  called  a  council,  and  excommunicated  the 
leader  of  the  insurrection,  Crescentius.     An  anti-Pope 

>  Mabillon,  Act.  Ord.  St.  Benedict,  vi.,  30;  Robinson,  Readings, 
i-,  259. 


404     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


had  been  elected,  John  XVI.,  formerly  the  Emperor's 
teacher  and  a  court  favourite.  Otto  reached  Rome 
with  a  large  army,  caught  the  fleeing  papal  usurper, 
deposed  him,  put  out  his  eyes,  cut  off  his  nose  and  ears, 
and  sent  him  through  the  streets  of  Rome  on  an  ass. 
Crescentius  was  beheaded,  and  with  him  a  dozen 
conspirators.1  Gregory  V.  was  restored  to  his  dignity 
only  to  die  within  a  year  (999).  As  his  successor 
Otto  chose  Gerbert,  his  old  teacher,  who  became 
Sylvester  II.,  the  idealist  and  reformer.2 

Otto  III.  was  occupied  a  great  deal  with  dreams 
about  a  world  Empire.  He  inherited  from  his  mother 
the  ambition  to  rule  the  East  and  from  his  father  the 
right  to  rule  the  West.  His  teachers  inspired  him  with 
a  desire  to  become  the  Christian  Emperor  of  the  world 
with  the  Pope  as  his  chief  assistant,  and  coloured  his 
whole  career  by  giving  him  a  monastic  view  of  life. 
He  made  frequent  visits  to  sacred  shrines  where  he 
remained  weeks  at  a  time.  In  Rome  he  built  his 
palace  purposely  beside  a  monastery.  The  idea  of  a 
holy  crusade  to  Jerusalem  was  in  his  mind.  He  felt 
called  upon  to  reform  the  Papacy,  which  he  enriched 
by  large  grants  and  strengthened  by  privileges,  and  he 
selected  most  of  his  chief  officials  from  the  churchmen. 
He  called  himself  the  "servant  of  Jesus  Christ"  and 
the  "servant  of  the  Apostle." 

After  having  taken  Rome  and  appointed  two  Popes, 
Otto  attempted  to  put  his  imperial  fancies  into  practice. 
Rome  was  made  his  permanent  residence  and  capital 
from  which  to  rule  the  world  as  "Emperor  of  the 
Romans."  On  the  Aventine  a  great  palace  was  built 
— a  thing  not  even  thought  of  by  Charles  the  Great. 

>  Milman,  ii.,  481. 
2  See  Chap.  XVIII. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  405 


The  ceremonies  of  the  Byzantine  court  were  introduced 
— a  long  retinue  of  servants,  an  imperial  guard,  and  a 
very  formal  etiquette.  The  young  ruler  refused  '  to 
eat  with  his  nobles  and  loved  to  sit  proudly  on  a  gaudy 
throne  arrayed  in  costly  purple  while  his  servants 
meekly  satisfied  every  whim.  He  likewise  aped  the 
Roman  Emperors  in  magnifying  the  office  of  patrician 
and  city  prefect,  by  calling  himself  "Consul"  and  by 
thinking  of  reviving  the  senate.  Dreaming  of  conquests 
beyond  the  seas,  he  appointed  a  naval  prefect.  Ger- 
many and  Italy  were  united  under  one  chancellor  and 
each  ruled  with  troops  from  the  other.  Germany,1 
Lombardy,  Greece,  Naples,  and  the  rest  of  the  world 
were  to  be  reduced  to  subject  provinces  of  the  restored 
Empire.  To  receive  the  sacred  sanction  of  his  most 
renowned  predecessor,  Charles  the-  Great,  for  these 
mighty  ideas,  Otto  III.  opened  his  tomb  in  the  cathe- 
dral at  Aachen  in  the  year  1000  and  from  the  body 
of  the  powerful  Teuton  carried  away  holy  relics.2 

Early  in  1000  the  turbulent  Romans  broke  out  in  a 
fresh  rebellion  and  the  world  Empire  was  destroyed 
about  as  easily  as  a  child's  house  of  blocks.  Besieged 
for  three  days  in  his  palace,  Otto  at  last  addressed 
the  discontented  mob  in  these  words: 

Are  you  my  Romans?  For  you  I  left  my  country  and 
my  friends.  For  love  of  you  I  have  sacrificed  my  Saxons 
and  all  the  Germans,  my  blood.  I  have  adopted  you  as 
my  sons;  I  have  preferred  you  to  all.  For  you  I  have  had 
stirred  up  against  me  the  envy  and  hatred  of  all.  And 
now  you  have  rejected  your  father;  you  have  destroyed 
my  friends  by  a  cruel  death ;  you  have  excluded  me  whom 

»  Thacher  and  McNeal,  No.  289. 

2  Hodgkin,  Italy  and  her  Invaders,  viii.,  273;  Mombert,  Charles 
the  Great,  485. 


406     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


you  should  not  exclude,  because  I  will  never  suffer  those 
to  be  exiled  from  my  affections  whom  I  embrace  with 
paternal  love. 1 

Soon  he  fled  from  Rome  never  to  return,  and  tried 
to  raise  an  army  in  Germany  but  failed.  The  Germans 
refused  to  sacrifice  their  blood  and  wealth  for  a  useless 
chimera  and  even  threatened  to  elect  a  new  king. 
Then  he  appealed  to  Italy  for  assistance,  but  Venice 
alone  promised  aid  and  that  was  small.  Otto  III.  's  uni- 
versal rule  dwindled  to  the  little  mountain  of  Paterno 
— like  Napoleon's  St.  Helena — and  there  he  died  in 
1 002  in  the  arms  of  the  faithful  Sylvester  II.  at  the 
age  of  22,  childless  and  deserted,  and  his  body  was 
carried  over  the  Alps  to  rest  by  the  side  of  Charles 
the  Great.  And  the  youthful  Pope  survived  the  young 
Emperor  just  a  twelvemonth. 

The  direct  line  of  Otto  the  Great  was  at  an  end. 
Henry  II.,  the  Saint,  who  was  in  Otto  III.'s  service 
in  Rome  (1001)  and  received  the  royal  and  imperial 
insignia  at  the  young  Emperor's  death  pending  a  new 
election,  claimed  the  German  throne  as  the  next  in 
descent.2  By  satisfactory  promises  to  the  lay  and 
secular  princes  he  defeated  his  rivals  and  was  crowned 
German  King  at  Mainz  (1002). 

In  his  political  policy  Henry  II.  followed  in  the  path 
already  formed.  He  subdued  the  strong  internal  foes 
in  Germany,  pacified  the  neighbouring  peoples,  provided 
for  the  union  of  Burgundy  with  Germany,  assumed  the 
iron  crown  of  Lombardy,  and  accepted  the  imperial 
crown  at  Rome  in  1014.  His  ecclesiastical  policy  was 
very  pronounced.  He  was  a  devout  and  ascetic 
champion  of  the  Papacy  and  stood  stoutly  for  reforms 

>  Fisher,  Med.  Emp.,  ii.,  203;  Mombert,  Charles  the  Great. 
2  Henry  II.  was  the  great-grandson  of  Otto  I. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  407 

such  as  the  abolition  of  simony,  the  denunciation  of 
the  marriage  of  priests  and  the  correction  of  monastic 
abuses.  He  urged  the  enforcement  of  these  necessary 
changes  through  a  general  council  and  laboured  for 
peace.  In  all  these  endeavours  he  had  the  sincere 
co-operation  of  Pope  Benedict  VIII.  The  bishopric 
of  Bamberg  was  created  during  this  rule. 

Conrad  II.  (1024-1039)  aimed  to  build  up  a  powerful 
centralised  Germany  and  through  it  to  rule  the  Empire. 
Though  compelled  to  fight  formidable  internal  con- 
spiracies all  his  life,  yet  he  succeeded  in  making  the 
crown  the  recognised  and  respected  authority  in  Ger- 
many. Like  Otto  I.  he  used  the  lesser  nobles  to 
curb  the  power  of  the  greater  nobles.  He  forced 
obedience  to  his  royal  laws  everywhere.  To  perpetuate 
his  rule  and  to  establish  the  principle  of  kingly  heredity 
he  had  his  son  and  heir,  Henry  III.,  crowned  and  cor- 
onated at  Aachen  (1028).  Since  political  power  de- 
pended largely  upon  landed  wealth  Henry  III.  received 
both  the  Duchy  of  Bavaria  (1029)  and  the  Duchy  of 
Swabia  (1038). 

The  foreign  policy  of  Conrad  II.  was  equally  wise. 
He  made  friends  of  the  powerful  King  Canute  and  his 
Danes  by  marrying  Heniy  III.  to  Canute's  daughter. 
The  Polish  King  was  reduced  to  a  vassal  duke  and 
Bohemia  and  Lucatia  were  won  back,  while  the  Bulgar- 
ians were  effectually  held  in  check.  He  assumed  the 
crown  of  Burgundy,  which  became  an  integral  part 
of  Germany  (1032)  and  gave  the  crown  to  his  son 
(1038).  Early  in  his  rule  (1026)  Conrad  had  entered 
Italy  and  assumed  the  iron  crown  of  Lombardy.  Then 
he  made  his  way  to  Rome  in  1027  on  Easter  day  and 
was  there  crowned  Emperor  by  Pope  John  XIX.  in 
the  presence   of  a  great   multitude   of  Romans   and 


408     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Germans.  Through  the  Normans  he  then  extended 
his  imperial  sway  over  southern  Italy,  but  ten  years, 
later  he  was  forced  to  make  a  journey  to  Rome  to 
reconquer  that  part  of  his  Empire. 

In  Germany  Conrad  II.  ruled  the  clergy  with  a  rod 
of  iron,  filled  bishoprics  for  purely  political  ends,  and 
used  the  Church  to  build  up  his  royal  powers.  In 
Lombardy  he  won  over  the  clerical  party  at  that  time 
hostile  to  the  Pope,  and  thus  smoothed  his  march 
to  Rome.  In  John  XIX.  he  found  one  of  the  worst 
examples  of  the  utter  worldliness  into  which  the  succes- 
sors of  Peter  could  degenerate.  John  XIX.  before 
his  election  had  been  only  a  business  man,  but  he  was 
a  brother  of  the  presiding  Pontiff  Benedict  VIII.,  and 
a  member  of  the  powerful  Tusculan  family.  By 
dint  of  money  x  he  won  the  office  and  in  one  day  was 
hurried  through  all  the  clerical  orders  and  installed 
into  power  (1024).  Hoping  for  a  powerful  ally,  John 
XIX.  had  invited  Conrad  II.  to  Rome.  A  great 
Lateran  Synod  followed  the  coronation  of  Conrad  II. 
on  Easter  day, 2  but  apparently  nothing  was  said  about 
reforms  in  the  Church,  although  badly  needed.  When 
Conrad  died  in  1039  the  German  Empire  had  reached 
its  pinnacle  of  greatness.  No  sovereign  since  Charles 
the  Great  had  exercised  such  powers,  for  the  German 
and  Italian  princes  were  subject  to  the  imperial  crown 
and  the  clergy  were  dependent  upon  it. 

Henry  III.  (1029-1056)  came  to  the  German  throne 
with  brighter  prospects  than  any  of  his  predecessors. 
What  a  field  for  an  Alexander,  a  Cassar,  or  a  Napoleon ! 
What  an  opportunity  to  cut  Germany  loose  from  the 

1  Glaber,  I.,  i.,  ch.  4. 

2  Rudolph,  King  of  Burgundy,  and  Canute,  King  of  England 
and  Denmark  were  both  present  at  the  coronation. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  409 


Empire  and  make  her  the  greatest  power  in  Europe! 
The  Polish  monarchy  was  falling  to  pieces;  Hungary- 
was  rent  by  the  pagan  and  Christian  parties;  Canute's 
northern  empire  had  broken  down;  Italy,  chronically 
subdivided,  was  awaiting  a  master;  and  the  young 
king  was  also  Duke  of  Bavaria,  Franconia,  and  Swabia. 
Hindesheim,  a  contemporary,  declared  that  no  one 
in  the  Empire  mourned  the  loss  of  Conrad  because 
such  better  things  were  expected  of  his  son,  one 
of  the   most   highly    cultured    young    men    of    the 


age 


1 


Henry  III.  continued  the  policy  of  Otto  I.  by  seeking 
to  increase  the  power  of  the  crown  at  the  expense  of  the 
petty  rulers.  Hence  duchies  were  given  to  his  relatives 
or  to  loyal  vassals.  The  lesser  nobility  and  the  com- 
mons were  used  to  counteract  the  influence  of  the 
lords  and  princes.  His  reign,  in  consequence,  was 
disturbed  by  no  serious  insurrections.  The  border^ 
states  were  subdued — Bohemia  in  1041  and  Hungary 
in  1044. 2  To  keep  the  peace  and  put  down  feuds  the 
Truce  of  God  was  proclaimed  in  1041  throughout 
Germany.  All  feuds  were  to  cease  from  Wednesday  eve 
till  Monday  morning  and  absolution  from  sin  was  the 
reward  for  keeping  the  Truce. 3  Those  who  purposely 
broke  it  were  penalised.  Burgundy  extended  it  to  the 
periods  between  Advent  and  Epiphany,  and  from 
Septuagesima  to  the  first  Sunday  after  Easter.  Henry 
III.  soon  made  himself  master  of  Italy  and  like  many 
a  predecessor  assumed  the  iron  crown  of  Lombardy 
and  then  established  his  supremacy  over  the  Normans 
in  the  south.      Out  of  a  rule  of  seventeen  years  he 

»  Steindorff,  Jahrb,  d.  Deutsch.  Reichs  unter  Heinrich,  III. 

2  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  32. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  242,  243. 


4io     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


spent  but  sixty-four  weeks  in  Italy.     In  1046  he  was 
coronated  Emperor  at  Rome  and  made  Patrician. 

Like  Charles  the  Great  and  Otto  the  Great  Henry 
III.  assumed  the  headship  of  the  Church.  The  Papacy, 
at  that  time,  was  a  three-headed  monster  which 
needed  a  Hercules  to  slay  it.  Benedict  IX.,  another 
member  of  the  Tusculum  family,  elected  Pope  when  a 
boy  of  eighteen  (1033),  had  led  a  life  of  indescribable 
crime  and,  in  consequence,  had  been  driven  from  the 
city  (1044)  but  returned  and  in  1046  held  the  Vatican. l 
Sylvester  III.  was  elected  anti-Pope  when  Benedict 
IX.  was  driven  out  and  lived  in  St.  Peter's.  Gregory 
VI.  literally  bought  the  papal  throne  of  Benedict  IX. 
(1045)  f°r  IOO°  pounds  of  silver  and  bribed  the  people 
into  approval.  He  took  up  his  residence  at  St.  Maria 
Maggiore. 2  Learning  of  these  disorders,  Henry  III. 
went  to  Italy  and  in  1046  held  the  Council  of  Sutri 
in  which  Gregory  VI.  acknowledged  his  guilt,  divested 
himself  of  his  papal  insignia  and  begged  forgiveness. 
Benedict  IX.  and  Sylvester  III.  were  declared  usurpers, 
simoniacs,  and  intruders,  hence  they  were  deposed. 
Benedict  IX.  hid  himself  for  future  trouble,  Sylvester 
III.  returned  to  his  bishopric  and  Gregory  VI.  was  sent 
into  exile  in  Germany.  The  Bishop  of  Bamberg, 
a  German,  was  chosen  Pope  in  a  council  held  in  Rome 
and  assumed  the  title  of  Clement  II.  (1046)  and  im- 
mediately coronated  Henry  III.  and  his  wife  with  the 
imperial  honours.3  This  is  the  beginning  of  a  series 
of  German  Popes  who  were  to  do  much  to  purify  and 
strengthen  the  Church.  Before  Henry  died  three 
such  Popes  were  elected.     Clement  II.  soon  assembled 

>  Schaff,  iv.,  298;  Milman,  ii.,  505. 

2  Muratori,  iii.,  2,  p.  345;  Hefele,  iv.,  707;  Giesbrecht,  ii.,  643. 

J  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  57. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  411 


a  council  in  Rome  to  extirpate .  simony  and  to  that 
end  had  several  canons  enacted.  But  his  reign  of 
less  than  a  year,  was  too  short  to  accomplish  much. 
Henry  III.  died  in  1056  with  his  great  Empire  full  of 
trouble  from  border  wars  and  rebellious  nobles.  The 
Empire  was  on  the  wane  and  his  son  took  up  a  crown 
of  difficulties. 

On  Germany  the  effects  of  the  creation  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire  were  very  marked.  It  established  the 
recognised  right  of  the  German  King  to  wear  the 
Italian  and  imperial  crowns  and  made  Aachen,  Milan, 
and  Rome  the  coronation  cities.  It  tended  to  weaken 
the  allegiance  of  the  Germans  to  their  king  when 
he  became  Emperor  and  spent  most  of  his  time, 
together  with  German  wealth  and  blood,  in  Italy.  It 
fused  the  German  King  and  the  Roman  Emperor  into 
a  product  different  from  either  and  effected  the  whole 
subsequent  history  of  both  Germany  and  the  Empire. 
The  two  systems  were  very  different:  one  was  cen- 
tralised, the  other  local;  one  rested  upon  a  "sublime 
theory,"  the  other  grew  out  of  anarchy;  one  was  ruled 
by  an  absolute  monarch,  the  other  by  a  limited  monarch ; 
one  was  based  on  the  equality  of  all  citizens,  the  other 
founded  on  inequality.  As  a  result  of  the  fusion  both 
offices  lost  and  won  certain  attributes  and  the  product 
was  a  "German  Emperor"  who  was  the  necessary 
head  of  feudalism  which  became  so  deeply  rooted  that 
it  took  ages  to  throw  it  off.  To  help  on  the  process  of 
disintegration  Otto  the  Great  allowed  the  five  great 
duchies  to  be  subdivided  and  thus  created  a  second 
order  of  nobility  and  greatly  increased  the  number 
of  nobles.  In  short  Germany  was  weakened,  im- 
poverished, divided,  and  stunted.  The  denationalisa- 
tion   of   Germany   was   continued   until    1870.     What 


4i2     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


might  not  have  been  the  splendid  career  of  Germany, 
had  Otto  the  Great  and  his  successors  devoted  their 
time  and  talent  to  the  creation  of  a  powerful  German 
national  state  as  did  the  French  and  English  kings? 
It  must  be  added,  however,  that  this  peculiar  relation 
with  Italy  opened  the  way  for  learning,  art,  and  a 
more  refined  civilisation  in  the  North  and  that,  in 
turn,  Germany  became  the  schoolmaster  of  Poland  and 
Bohemia  and  perpetuated  the  language,  literature,  and 
law  of  Rome. 

On  Italy  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  left  a  deep  and  per- 
manent impression.  It  gave  Italy  a  long  line  of 
foreign  rulers  who  seldom  cared  much  for  her  real  in- 
terests and  only  sought  to  exploit  her  for  selfish  ends. 
It  prevented  the  establishment  of  a  powerful  national 
state  as  a  republic,  or  as  a  monarchy,  under  some 
native  noble,  or  a  Pope,  until  1859.  On  the  contrary 
it  encouraged  decentralisation  and  local  division  of 
the  people.  Italy  became  the  scene,  cause,  and  victim 
of  countless  wars  and  invasions  by  foreign  rulers;  or 
of  inumerable  local  contests  which  sapped  the  nation  of 
all  strength  and  ambition. 

On  the  Empire  the  results  were  plainly  seen.  The 
Empire  of  the  Caesars  and  of  Charles  the  Great  was 
revived  on  a  German  basis  with  a  German  Emperor 
and  kept  alive  till  1806  when  Napoleon  dealt  it  a 
death-blow.  Its  earlier  extent  and  later  claims  were 
never  realised.  It  was  forced  into  a  continual  struggle 
for  its  existence  with  the  Italian  republics  and  German 
dukes,  with  the  Papacy,  and  with  the  national  states 
of  Europe.  The  three  theories  about  the  relation 
of  the  world-empire  to  the  world-church  received  final 
development.  . 

1.     The  Holy  Empire,  or  ideal  theory,  unfeed  the 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  413 


Church  and  the  state,  the  cross  and  the  sceptre,  to 
attain  their  legitimate  boundaries,  namely,  the  world. 
Hence  the  Papacy  and  the  Empire  were  but  two  sides 
of  the  same  thing  and  their  two  heads  co-operated  to 
rule  the  same  regions  and  peoples,  but  in  different 
spheres.  The  Pope  ruled  the  souls  of  men ;  the  Emperor 
their  bodies;  but  both  were  necessary,  equal,  and 
established  by  God.  It  was  a  confusion  of  these  two 
powers  and  ideas  that  produced  such  mediaeval  anach- 
ronisms as  churchmen  who  were  worldly  princes  with 
large  estates,  who  led  their  flocks  to  war,  and  who 
became  the  prime  ministers  of  kings ;  and  secular  rulers 
who  appointed  Church  officials  and  called  and  presided 
over  councils.  This  was  the  theory  held  by  dreamers 
and  theorists,  but  it  was  never  realised. 

2.  The  papal  theory  made  the  Pope  alone  God's 
representative  on  earth  and  maintained  that  the  Em- 
peror received  his  right  to  rule  from  St.  Peter's  successor. 
For  historical  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  this  position 
attention  was  called  to  the  power  of  the  keys,  the 
Donation  of  Constantine,  the  coronation  of  Pepin, 
the  restoration  of  the  Empire  in  the  West.  Such 
figures  as  the  sun  and  the  moon,  the  body  and  the  soul, 
etc.,  were  used  with  telling  effect  by  the  clerical  party 
who  advanced  this  theory.  It  was  upheld  by  Nicholas 
I.,  Hildebrand,  Alexander  III.,  Innocent  III.,  and 
culminated  with  Boniface  VIII.  at  the  jubilee  of  1300 
when,  seated  on  the  throne  of  Constantine,  girded 
with  the  imperial  sword,  wearing  a  crown,  and  waving 
a  sceptre,  he  shouted  to  the  throng  of  loyal  pilgrims: 
"I  am  Cassar — I  am  Emperor." 

3.  The  imperial  theory  put  the  Emperor  above  the 
Pope  as  God's  vice-regent  on  earth  and  reduced  the 
Pope  to  the  position  of  chief  bishop  in  the  Empire.     It 


414     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


was  held  that  historical  evidence  to  support  this  position 
could  be  found  in  the  Jewish  theocracy ;  the  words  of 
Jesus  and  the  apostles  about  civil  power ;  the  seniority 
of  the  Empire  over  the  Papacy;  the  attitude  of  Con- 
stantine  and  later  Emperors ;  the  work  of  Charles  the 
Great,  Otto  the  Great,  and  their  illustrious  successors. 
This  theory  was  defended  by  the  Emperors,  kings,  civil 
lawyers,  and  members  of  the  imperial  party. 

So  far  as  the  Papacy  was  concerned  the  Holy  Roman 

•>L  Empire  created  a  rival  world-ruler  with  whom  for  five 
hundred  years  the  Popes  were  in  almost  endless  strife. 
Under  powerful  rulers  like  Otto  the  Great  the  Papacy 
was  subjected  to  the  Empire  more  absolutely  than  in 
the  day  of  Charles  the  Great.  Under  the  great  German 
Emperors  much  was  done  to  reform  the  Church  and  to 
advance  its  interests  and  influence  in  the  world.  Each 
Emperor  took  a  coronation  oath  to  defend  and  protect 
the  Church  against  heretics,  schismatics,  infidels, 
pagans,  and  all  other  enemies,  and  that  obligation  was 
as  a  rule  faithfully  and  loyally  kept.  But  all  things 
considered  was  the  Papacy  stronger  or  weaker,  better 
or  worse,  for  the  creation  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire? 
Does  the  fact  that  the  Papacy  declined  with  the  decay 

'  and  death  of  the  Empire  suggest  a  necessary  depend- 
ence of  the  former  on  the  latter  ? 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

i. — in  English:     The  materials  available  in  English 
are  scarce  and  very  unsatisfactory.     A  few  docu- 
ments will  be  found  in  the  following: 
i. — Balzani,  U.,  Early  Chronicles  of  Italy.    Lond., 

1883. 
2. — Henderson,  Select  Historical  Documents  of  the 
Middle  Ages. 
•  3. — Ogg,  Source  Book  of  Medieval  History. 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  415 

4.-— Robinson,  Readings  in  European  History,  i., 

ch.  12.  , 

5.— Thatcher  and  McNeal,  A   Source  Book  for 

Medieval  History. 
6  —Univ  of  Penn.,  Translations  and  Reprints. 
II  —in  foreign  languages  :     The  primary  sources  not 
in   English    are  very  extensive.1     The    chief  col- 
lections are:  .  .     . 
1  — Altmann,  W.,  and  Bernheim,  E.,  Ausgewhatle 
Urkunden  zur  Erlauterung  der   Verfassungs- 
gesckichte  Deutschlands  im  Mittelalter.     Berl. , 


1801. 


2.— Baronius,    Annates,    vols,  xiii.-xix.     Luca, 

1738.     35  vols. 
3.— Boehmer,  J.  F.,  Fontes  rerum  Germanicarum. 

Stuttg.,  1843-68.     4  vols. 
4  —.D^  Geschictschreiber  der  deutschen   Vorzeit. 
2d  ed.     Berl.  and  Leipz.,  1885  sqq.  90  vols. 

e Doeberl,    M.,   Monumenta  Germanics  selecta 

ab  a.  768' usque  ad  a.  12 50.     Munch.,  1889-90. 

6 Jaffe,   P.,   Bibliotheca  rerum  Germanicarum. 

Berl.,'  1864-73.     6  vols.     Regesta  Pontificum 
Romanum  (to  1 1 98).  Berl.  1 85 1. 
7.— Lehmann,  H.  O.,  Quellen  zurDeutschenReichs- 
und  Rechtsgeschichte.     Berl.,  1 89 1. 

g Mansi,  Sacrorum  Conciliorum  Collectio,  xvm. 

9'.— Migne',  vol.  142.     Glaber,  Historia  sui  tem- 

poris. 
10.— Mirbt,  Quellen  zur  Geschichte  des  Papsttum. 

!  1  \ Muratori,  Rerum  Italicarum Scriptores.   Med., 

1723-51.     28  vols. 

I2. Pertz,  et  al.,  Monumenta  Germania  Historica, 

1826  ff. 
13.— Pflugh-Harttung,    Acta   Pontificum   Roman- 
orum.     Tub.,  1 881-8.     3  vols. 

I4> Scriptores    rerum    Germanicarum    in   usum 

Scholarum.     Hanover,  1840  ff.     42  vols. 
i<—  Stumpf,    K.    F.,   Die  Kaiserkunden  des   X., 
XL,   und   XII.,    Jahrhunderts   Chronologisch 
verzeichnet.     Innsb.,  1865-83. 
l6  _ Waitz,  G.,  Urkunden  zur  Deutschen  Verfass- 
ungsgeschichte    im   11    und    12    Jahrhundert. 
Keil,  1886. 
J  See  Potthast,  Wegweiser. 


416     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


B.— SECONDARY: 
i. — special: 

i. — Bryce,  J.,  The  Holy  Roman  Empire. 


Rev. 


ed.,  1904. 

-Dollinger,   J.  J.   I.,   The  Empire  of  Charles 

the  Great  and  His  Successors.     Lond.,  1894. 
. — Dunning,  W.  A.,  History  of  Political  Theories. 

N.Y.,  1901.     Vol.  i. 
. — Emerton,    E.,    Mediceval    Europe.       Bost., 

1896. 
. — Fisher,    H.    A.    L.,    The  Mediceval  Empire. 

Lond.,  1898.     2  vols. 

-Gierke,  O.,  Political  Theories  of  the  Middle 

Ages.     Camb.,  1900. 

—Greenwood,  A.  D.,  Empire  and  Papacy  in 

the  Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1896. 
8. — Greenwood,  T.,  Cathedra  Petri.    Lond.,  1859- 

72.     6  vols. 

-Gregorovius,    F.,    History    of    the    City    of 

Rome   in   the   Middle   Ages.      Lond.,    1903. 

Vol.  iii. 
10. — Lea,  H.  C,  Studies  in  Church  History. 
11. — Maitland,  S.  R.,  The  Dark   Ages.      2d    ed. 

Lond.,  1845. 
12. — Oman,  C,  The  Dark  Ages.     Lond.,  1898. 
13. — Tout,  T.   F.,   The  Empire  and  the  Papacy. 

Lond.,  1898. 
14. — Turner,  S.  E.,  Sketch  of  the  Germanic  Con- 
stitution.    N.  Y.,  1888.     26-80. 


Bibliographical  Note: — Some  of  the  best  books 
on  this  subject  are  in  German.  So  far  no  trans- 
lations have  appeared.  Among  many  may 
be  mentioned : — Dresdner,  Kultur-  und  Sitten- 
geschichte  der  italienischen  Geistlichkeit  1890. 
2. — Giesbrecht,  W.  V.,  Geschichte  der  deutschen 
Kaiserzeit.  Braun.,  1895.  i.-ii.  6  vols.  3. — 
Hauck,  A.,  Kirchengeschichte  Deutschlands. 
Leip.,  1 887-1 900.  Vol.  iii.  4. — Jahrbiicher 
der  Deutschen  Geschichte.  Berlin,  1862  ff. 
5. — Langen,  Geschichte  der  romischen  Kirche 
Vol.  iii.  6. — Richter,  G.,  and  Kohl,  H., 
Annalen  der  Deutschen  Geschichte  im  Mittel- 
alter.        Halle,     1873-90.        7. — Waitz,     G., 


Holy  Roman  Empire  and  the  Papacy  417 

Deutsche  Verfassungsgeschichte.     Kiel,  1844  ff. 
8  vols.    8. — Watterich,  Pontificum  romanorum 
vitce ab  aequalibus conscriptce.     1862.     2  vols. 
11. — general: 

Adams,  ch.  7,  8,  10.  Alzog,  ii.,  107-111.  Butler, 
ch.  31,  55-57,  62.  Chantrel,  ch.  3.  Coxe, 
Lect.  4,  sec.  20-25.  Crooks,  ch.  33.  Darrus, 
ii.,  358,  580.  Dollinger,  iii.,  ch.  4,  sec.  1; 
ch.  5,  sec.  2-3.  Fisher,  pd.  5,  ch.  2 ;  pd.  6,  ch. 
2.  Gibbon,  ch.  49.  Gieseler  §21,  22,  24,  27. 
Gilmartin,  i,  31.  Hallam,  ch.  1,  pt.  1,  ch.  3, 
pt.  1.  Hardwick,  ch.  4,  sec.  2;  ch.  10,  sec.  2. 
Hase,  sec.  170-192.  Hore,  ch.  12.  Kurtz, 
i.,  436-438,  483-495.  ii-  25-52-  Milman, 
bk.  5,  ch.  7,  11,  12,  13.  Moeller,  pd.  2,  ch.  2. 
Mosheim,  cent.  9,  10.  Neander,  pd.  4,  §2. 
Schaff,  pd.  4,  ch.  4. 


37 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

PREPARATIONS  FOR  THE   HILDEBRANDINE  REFORMATION 

Outline:  I. — Decline  of  the  Papacy  after  Nicholas  I.  (858-867). 
II. — Reform  efforts  before  the  time  of  Hildebrand.  III. — The  youth 
and  education  of  Hildebrand.  IV. — The  Hildebrandine  Popes. 
V. — Sources. 

NICHOLAS  I.,  through  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  De- 
cretals, had  raised  the  Church  above  the  state, 
made  the  Pope  supreme  in  the  Church,  and  inau- 
gurated needed  reforms. *  From  Nicholas  I.  to  Hilde- 
brand (867-1049),  for  about  two  centuries,  the  Popes  as 
a  rule  were  men  of  very  ordinary  ability  and  education. 
Many  of  them  gained  the  papal  office  by  crime,  or 
force,  or  bribery,  and  used  it  for  corrupt  purposes. 
Most  of  the  fifty  Popes  and,  six  anti-JPopes  of  this  period 
were  Italians.  The  chair  of  St.  Peter  was  far  more 
political  and  worldly  than  spiritual.  The  latter  part 
of  the  ninth  century  Rome  saw  twelve  Popes  elected 
in  twenty -three  years.  Hadrian  TTT  (867-872),  an 
ex-married  man  with  a  family,  connected  with  many 
a  domestic  scandal,2  succeeded  Nicholas  I.,  and 
defended  the  papal  pretensions  with  ability  and  dignity. 
Then    followed    John    VIII.     (872-882),    an    active, 

«  See  Chapter  XVI. 

2  The  Pope's  wife  was  still  living  at  the  time  of  his  election.  His 
daughter,  a  maiden  of  forty,  was  abducted  by  the  son  of  Bishop 
Aresenius.  When  threatened  with  punishment,  the  abductor 
murdered  the  Pope's  wife  and  daughter.     See  Schaff,  iv.,  277. 

418 


Preparations  for  Hildebrand  4J9 

passionate,  shrewd  prelate,  who  was  killed  by  a  relative 
covetous  of  the  papal  throne  with  its  wealth  and 
influence.  Stephen  VI.  (896-897)  in  revenge  caused 
the  body  of  Formosus,  his  predecessor,  to  be  exhumed, 
clad  in  pontifical  robes,  seated  on  the  pontifical  throne, 
tried  by  a  synod,  deposed  as  a  usurper,  the  fingers 
with  which  the  pontifical  blessing  was  given  cut  off, 
and  thrown  into  the  Tiber.  He,  himself,  was  cast  into 
prison  and  there  strangled  to  death  (897). 

During  the  tenth  century  the  Papacy  was  a  reflection 
of  the  chaotic,  anarchistic  condition  of  the  state, 
the  demoralisation  and  depravity  of  society,  and  the 
ignorance,  superstition,  and  crime  of  the  day.1  The 
head  of  the  Church  had  lost  all  dignity  and  independ- 
ence, and  the  office  had  become  a  prey  to  greed,  force, 
and  intrigue.  Most  of  the  Popes  ended  their  careers  in 
deposition,  prison,  or  murder.  The  Marquises  of 
Tuscany  and  the  Counts  of  Tusculum  ruled  the  city 
of  Rome  and  dictated  the  election  of  Popes  for  more 
than  half  a  century.  Three  bold,  beautiful,  wealthy 
Roman  women,—- Theodora  and  her  two  daughters — 
Marozia  and  Theodora — filled  the  chair  of  St.  Peter 
with  their  lovers  and  their  bastards.2  This  period 
has  been  given  the  significant  name  of .  pornocracy. 
John  X.  (914-928),  the  first  warrior- Pope,  lead  an 
army  against  the  Saracens  and  defeated  them.  He 
was  imprisoned  and  murdered  by  the  wicked  Marozia 
(928).  John  XII.  (955-963)  was  governor  of  Rome 
and  frequently  appeared  dressed  as  a  soldier.3  The 
Papacy   was    openly   bought    and   sold    for    money. 

»  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  245- 

2  Alzog,  ii.,  §187;  Hefele,  iv.,  575;  Gregorovius,  iii.,  282;   P     ■ 
V.,  29/;  Migne,  vol.  136,  827,  852;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  251. 

3  See  Chapter  XVII. 


42o     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Benedict  VIII.  and  John  XIX.  were  both  indebted 
for  their  elevation  to  acknowledged  bribery,  and  the 
latter  was  only  a  layman  when  elected  but  in  one 
day  passed  through  all  the  requisite  clerical  degrees 
and  thus  qualified  for  the  high  office.  The  most  con- 
spicuous case  was  that  of  Gregory  VI.  who  paid  one 
thousand  pounds  in  silver  for  the  empty  honour. l  The 
office  of  the  Papacy  practically  became  hereditary. 
Laymen  as  well  as  churchmen  were  elected.  Benedict 
IX.  (1033-1045)  ascended  the  papal  throne  at  the  age 
of  ten  and  thought  of  marrying  in  order  to  transmit 
his  infamous  rule.2 

The  higher  clergy  in  this  period  of  disorder  were 
for  the  most  part  secular  princes.  They  ruled  large 
tracts  of  land,  possessed  and  exercised  royal  preroga- 
tives, and  were  granted  immunities  and  privileges  such 
as  market  rights,  coinage,  tolls,  feudal  judicature,  etc. 
Furthermore  they  assumed  secular  titles  and  offices. 
The  leading  statesmen  of  the  day  were  chosen  from  the 
clergy.  Louis  the  Infant  made  the  Abbot  of  Corvey 
a  count  (900) ,  and  gave  the  Bishop  of  Tours  the  same 
title  (902).  Henry  I.  made  the  Bishop  of  Tule  also 
the  Duke  of  Tule  (928) . 3  Otto  I.  gave  his  own  brother, 
the  Archbishop  of  Koln,  the  duchy  of  Lorraine  and 
made  him  Count  of  Brandenburg  and  Magdeburg. 
Otto  III.  and  Henry  III.  also  made  many  such  grants 
to  churchmen.  These  higher  clergy  were  married  in 
many  cases,  or  lived  with  mistresses,  and  had  families. 

»  See  Chapter  XVII. 

s  Jaffe\  50;  Hefele,  iv.,  707. 

3  Bomer,  Regesta,  v.,  3.  See  Hauck,  iii.,  57-59.  But  it  must  be 
remembered  that  among  these  wicked  Popes  there  appeared 
here  and  there  a  Pope  distinguished  for  purity  of  life.  Such  were 
John  IX.  (898-900),  Benedict  IV.  (900-903),  Anastasius  III. 
(911-913),  Leo  VI.  (928-929). 


Preparations  for  Hildebrand  421 


After  the  time  of  Otto  I.  they  began  to  counteract  the 
power  of  the  nobles,  hence  they  were  made  more  and 
more  dependent  upon  kings,  who  claimed  the  right 
to  appoint  them,  who  invested  them  with  their  power, 
and  to  whom  they  swore  allegiance.  They  appeared 
at  the  court  of  the  king  like  nobles,  and  in  the  event  of 
war  led  their  troops  in  person  to  the  battlefield.  De- 
positions for  alleged  disloyalty  were  very  common.  As 
the  bishops  became  more  involved  in  secular  affairs 
they  naturally  neglected  their  spiritual  duties.  Simony 
crept  in  as  a  consequence  and  was  shamefully  practised. 
Often  the  worst  fitted  instead  of  the  best  prepared 
persons  were  given  the  coveted  sinecures.  It  was  but 
natural  that  the  moral  example  set  by  the  Pope  should 
reveal  itself  in  the  lives  of  the  clergy. 

Greedy  hands  were  raised  against  the  monasteries, 
and  their  rich  lands  were  frequently  given  as  fiefs  to 
laymen. 1  The  abbots  began  to  strive  for  worldly 
reputation  and  power.  Hence  the  old  discipline  was 
neglected,  and  disorders  and  excesses  of  all  kinds 
prevailed  among  the  monks  and  nuns. 2  The  common 
priests  and  monks  were  probably  better  as  a  rule  than 
either  Popes  or  bishops,  still  in  too  many  cases  they 
were  prone  to  follow  the  example  set  by  their  superiors. 
The  laity  were  undoubtedly  on  a  lower  moral  and 
intellectual  plane  than  the  priesthood. 3  Consequently 
few  complaints  were  made  by  them  against  the  sins  and 
crimes  of  Popes,  bishops,  abbots,  and  priests.  The 
denunciation  of  flagrant  abuses  and  the  cry  for  reform, 
as  far  as  there  was  any,  came  from  the  better  clergy. 
Of  the  eighty  councils  held  in  France  during  the  eleventh 

1  Gieseler,  ii.,  332. 

2  Mansi,  xviii.,  270. 
a  Alzog,  ii.,  §200. 


422     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


century,  every  one  denounced  the  lawlessness  of  the 
laity  and  the  unchastity  and  simony  of  the  clergy.1 

The  manifold  corruptions  of  the  tenth  century  and 
the  first  part  of  the  eleventh  produced  a  clergy  that  had 
almost  forfeited  its  spiritual  character.  Religion  was 
a  cloak  for  immorality,  for  licentious  self-indulgence, 
and  for  corruption  and  venality  which  can  scarcely  be 
equalled  in  the  entire  history  of  the  Christian  Church. 
It  was  a  matter  of  common  notoriety  that  France  and 
Germany  were  addicted,  almost  equal  to  Italy,  to  a 
shameless  traffic  in  ecclesiastical  offices  and  preferments. 

The  most  startling  picture  of  the  condition  of  the 
clergy  comes  from  the  pen  of  Desiderius,  Abbot  of 
Monte  Cassino,  who  later  became  Pope  Victor  III. : 

The  Italian  priesthood,  and  among  them  most  con- 
spicuously the  Roman  pontiffs,  are  in  the  habit  of  defying 
all  law  and  all  authority;  thus  utterly  confounding  together 
things  sacred  and  profane.  During  all  this  time  the 
Italian  priesthood,  and  none  more  conspicuously  than  the 
Roman  pontiffs,  set  at  naught  all  ecclesiastical  law  and 
authority.  The  people  sold  their  suffrages  for  money  to 
the  highest  bidder;  the  clergy,  moved  and  seduced  by 
avarice  and  ambition,  bought  and  sold  the  sacred  rights 
of  ordination,  and  carried  on  a  gigantic  traffic  with  the 
gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Few  prelates  remained  un- 
tainted with  the  vile  pollution  of  simony;  few,  very  few, 
kept  the  commandments  of  God,  or  served  him  with 
upright  hearts;  following  their  chiefs  to  do  evil,  the  great 
sacerdotal  herd  rushed  headlong  down  the  precipice  into 
the  quagmire  of  licentiousness  and  profligacy:  priests  and 
deacons,  whose  duty  it  was  to  serve  God  with  clean  hands, 
and  with  chaste  bodies  to  administer  the  sacraments  of  the 
Lord,  took  to  themselves  wives  after  the  manner  of  the 
laity;   they   left    families   behind   them,    and   bequeathed 

1  Alzog,  ii.,  §200. 


Preparations  for  Hildebrand  423 

their  ill-gotten  wealth  to  their  children;  yea,  even  bishops, 
in  contempt  of  all  shame  and  decency,  dwelt  with  their  wives 
under  the  same  roof — a  nefarious  and  execrable  custom, 
prevailing,  alas!  most  commonly  in  that  city  where  the 
laws,  thus  shamefully  set  at  naught,  first  issued  from 
the  sacred  lips  of  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles  and  his  holy 
successors.1 

When  Otto  III.,  the  last  of  the  Saxon  Emperors, 
died,  the  Papacy  had  become,  apparently,  merged  in 
the  state.  The  initiative  of  the  Pope  in  all  important 
matters  seemed  to  flow  from  imperial  rather  than 
pontifical  prerogative.  The  arbitrary  erection  of  all 
sorts  of  ecclesiastical  foundations,  the  unquestioned 
secular  appointment  to  the  highest  offices  in  the  Church, 
and  the  legislation  by  the  state  in  ecclesiastical  affairs, 
all  point  to  a  closer  fusion  of  the  two  powers  than  since 
the  year  476.  But  there  was  no  deliberate  intention  to 
encroach  upon  ecclesiastical  right.  The  alliance  was 
reciprocally  advantageous.  There  could  be  no  Emperor 
without  a  Pope,  and  no  Pope  without  an  Emperor. 
The  causes  for  this  ascendancy  of  the  temporal  power 
were:  (1)  the  decay  of  ecclesiastical  organisation  and 
discipline;  (2)  the  disruption  of  society  and  the 
confusion  of  political  matters  in  Italy  and  Europe 
generally ;  (3)  the  rise  of  the  power  and  ambition  of 
the  German  sovereigns ;  (4)  the  social  demoralisation 
of  the  age — the  wide-spread  incontinence,  perjury, 
venality,  rapine,  bribery,  theft,  and  murder  which  in- 
fected the  Church  to  its  heart's  core.  Until  these 
humiliating  and  devitalising  forces  were  remedied,  the 
Church  could  not  hope  to  attain  independence.2 

Several  distinct  efforts  at  reform  were  made  before 

1  Greenwood,  bk.  ix.,  ch.  3. 
« Ibid.,  bk.  x.,  ch.  1. 


424    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  time  of  Hildebrand,  first  by  the  German  Emperors 
and  secondly  by  the  German  Popes.  Henry  the  Fowler 
(918-936)  declared  that  he  would  abolish  simony 
but  failed  to  do  so.  Otto  the  Great  (936-973)  deposed 
the  criminal  Pope  John  XII.,  elected  Leo  VIII.  in  his 
place,  and  honestly  intended  to  improve  the  Papacy. 
Otto  III.  (983-1002),  a  great  religious  enthusiast, 
desired  to  reform  the  Church  through  good  Popes. 
Hence  he  chose  Bruno,  a  man  of  piety  and  morality, 
as  the  first  German  Pope,  and  then  appointed  Gerbert 
renowned  for  sanctity  and  learning.  Henry  II.,  called 
the  Saint  (1002-1024),  was  the  first  genuine  imperial 
reformer.  He  opened  a  campaign  in  Germany  against 
simony  and  the  marriage  of  the  clergy.  He  reformed 
the  monasteries  by  destroying  or  uniting  small  monas- 
teries, by  abolishing  abuses,  and  by  confiscating  lands. 
With  the  King  of  France  he  agreed  to  hold  a  great 
council  at  Pavia  to  cure  the  evils  in  the  Church  both 
north  and  south  of  the  Alps  (1023).  Notwithstanding 
these  efforts  little  real  reform  was  accomplished.  Henry 
III.  (1039-1056),  thoroughly  imbued  with  Clugniac 
zeal  for  reformation,  had  Leo  IX.  hold  a  big  synod 
at  Mainz  (1049)  m  which  simony  was  denounced, 
marriage  of  the  clergy  condemned,  and  local  prelates 
ordered  to  abolish  both  evils.  Personally  this  ruler 
was  wholly  free  from  simony  and  waged  an  unrelenting 
war  against  the  abuse  both  in  Italy  and  in  Germany. l 
He  deposed  three  bishops  for  sins  and  crimes.  He  ap- 
pointed a  series  of  Clugniac  puritans  to  the  papal  chair  2 
and  thus  paved  the  way  for  Hildebrand. 

>  Read  his  address  to  the  Council  of  Pavia  in  Fisher,  Medieval 
Empire,  ii.,  68.     Cf.  Greenwood,  bk.  ix.,  ch.  3,  4. 

'  Clement  II.,  Damascus  II.,  Leo  IX.,  Victor  II.  Thatcher  and 
McNeal,  No.  57. 


Preparations  for  Hildebrand  425 

The  German  Popes  were  very  active  in  reformatory 
efforts.  Gregory  V.  (996-999),  who  was  Bruno1  of  the 
royal  house  of  Germany,  appointed  by  Otto  II., 
renowned  for  piety  and  of  unblemished  character, 
assumed  a  lofty,  dignified  attitude  as  Pope  and  soon 
made  his  power  felt  in  Europe.  He  purified  the  papal 
court  as  far  as  possible  and  suppressed  the  independence 
of  the  French  clergy,  but  died  too  soon  to  realise  his 
hopes  of  reformation. 

Gerbert,  or  Sylvester  II.  (999-1003), 2  born  of  poor 
parents,  was  educated  as  a  teacher  first  in  the  Clugniac 
cloister  of  Aurillac  and  then  taken  by  Count  Borrel  of 
Barcelona  to  Spain,  where  he  studied  mathematics  and 
the  natural  sciences  in  the  Mohammedan  schools.  There 
Bishop  Hatto  took  a  fancy  to  him  and  invited  him 
to  go  to  Rome  where  Pope  John  XIII.  noticed  him 
and  recommended  him  to  Otto  the  Great  (971).  The 
Emperor  sent  him  to  Rheims  to  be  instructed  in  logic 
(972) .  The  Archbishop  Adelbert  of  Rheims  soon  made 
him  a  teacher  in  the  cathedral  school.  There  he  taught 
the  writings  of  Aristotle,  the  Latin  classics,  and  the 
sciences.  Boethius  was  his  favourite  author  and 
science  his  "darling  study."  He  had  many  pupils 
from  far  and  near  and  gained  great  fame  for  his 
scholarship.3 

In  those  days  nearly  every  great  man  was  drawn  into 
the  Church,  not  alone  because  his  services  were 
needed,  but  also  for  the  reason  that  in  that  field  were 
the  greatest  opportunities  for  advancement.  Otto  III., 
therefore,  made  Gerbert  iVbbot  of  Gabbia,  but  he  soon 
resigned  the  position  (982).     Nine  years  later  he  was 

»  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  259. 

2  Migne,  vol.  139,  p.  85;  Ollaris  CEuvres  de  Gerbert. 

s  Mon.  Ger.  Hist.,  ii.,  561. 


426     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


chosen  Archbishop  of  Rheims  (991). i  In  this  new 
office  he  was  kept  very  busy.  He  had  a  council  pass 
an  edict  which  was  practically  a  declaration  of  in- 
dependence.2 He  formed  a  confession  of  faith  which 
was  not  considered  orthodox.3  His  severe  code  of 
morals  offended  the  looser  clergy  and  aroused  the 
jealousy  of  others.  Consequently  a  party  was  organ- 
ised against  him  composed  of  the  clergy,  Emperor,  and 
Pope;  and  the  papal  legate  held  a  court  in  Germany 
which  deprived  him  of  his  episcopal  functions. 4  Thus 
driven  from  office,  he  joined  the  court  of  Otto  III.  to 
cast  his  spell  over  that  young  idealist.  In  996  he  went 
with  him  down  to  Italy  where  he  was  soon  elevated  to 
the  Archbishopric  of  Ravenna  and  invested  with  the 
insignia  of  his  office  by  Gregory  V.  (998).  Upon  the 
death  of  Gregory  V.,  in  999  Otto  III.  elevated  him  to 
that  important  office s  as  Sylvester  II.  He  surrendered 
his  heretical  ideas  and  became  the  great  forerunner  of 
Hiidebrand  in  attacking  simony,  in  denouncing  clerical 
abuses,  in  subjecting  the  higher  clergy  to  his  will,  and 
in  compelling  obedience  from  the  secular  powers. 
To  Stephen  of  Hungary  he  gave  a  king's  crown  and 
made  him  primate  (1000) . 6  He  suggested  the  crusades 
and  laboured  with  Otto  III.  for  the  realisation  of  the 
world  Empire.  After  his  death  in  1003  he  soon  became 
the  subject  of  all  sort  of  wild  legends. 

Benedict  VIII.  (101 2-1024)  was  elevated  to  the 
Papacy  as  a  reform  Pope  by  Henry  IV  and  the  German 
party,  though   he  was  not  a  German.      He  belonged 

'  Mon.  Gcr.  Hist.,  iii.,  658. 

2  Milman,  ii.,    491. 

3  Ibid. 

*  Milman,  ii.,  493;  SchafT,  iv.,  290. 

s  Milman,  ii.,  496. 

6  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  56. 


Preparations  for  Hildebrand  427 

to  the  Clugniac  reform  party  and  was  a  brave,  independ- 
ent Pope  who  joined  the  Emperor  in  assailing  simony 
and  in  sanctioning  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy.  Clement 
II.  (1046-1047)  was  made  Pope  by  Henry  111.  after 
deposing  three  rival  Popes.  He  held  a  Roman  synod 
which  condemned  simony  for  the  future,  forbade  the 
practice  by  churchmen,  made  the  penalty  for  dis- 
obedience excommunication,  and  endeavoured  to 
eradicate  the  evil  in  Italy  and  Germany.1 

The  reform  efforts  of  the  Popes  were  supplemented 
by  the  reforming  monastic  orders.  St.  Nilus  (910-1005) , 
a  Greek  born  in  Calabria,  after  his  wife's  death  in  940 
entered  the  monastery  of  St.  Mercurius,  where  he  soon 
gained  renown  for  his  tortures,  piety,  and  studies. 
Becoming  disgusted  with  the  monastic  practices,  he 
left  the  convent  and  wandered  about  as  a  hermit, 
taking  St.  Anthony  as  his  model.  His  fame  soon 
spread  abroad  so  that  when  he  made  a  pilgrimage 
to  Rome  he  was  greatly  honoured  there  and  even 
consulted  by  Gregory  V.  and  Otto  III.  It  was  not  long 
before  he  gained  a  large  following  of  ascetics  in  Italy 
and  with  them  founded  several  cloisters  which  were 
models  of  lofty  zeal  and  piety. 2 

Another  monk  of  this  period  imbued  with  the  desire 
tor  reformation  within  the  Church  was  St.  Dunstan 
(924-988),  the  son  of  a  West  Saxon  noble,  educated  in 
the  monastic  school  of  Glastonbury,  and  trained  at 
court.  ^  He  early  adopted  the  life  of  a  monk,  became 
a  hermit,  studied  the  Scriptures  and  made  bells,  and 

1  Mansi,  xix.,  625. 

2  Migne,  vol.  120,  p.  9-166;  Mon.  Ger.  Hist.,  iv.,  616;  Neander, 
iii.,  420;  Butler,  Lives  of  the  Saints. 

i  Hook,  Lives  of  Archbishops  of  Canterbury;  Green,  Conquest  of 
England;  Dictionary  of  National  Biography;  Milman,  bk.  viii.,  ch.  1; 
Butler,  Lives  of  the  Saints;  Lea.,  History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy. 


428     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

was  given  to  prayers  and  visions.  Appointed  Abbot  of 
Glastonbury  in  945,  he  began  to  reform  the  monastic 
life  by  restoring  the  early  purity  and  simplicity. 
Becoming  too  much  absorbed  in  the  politics  of  his  day 
and  thereby  coming  under  the  displeasure  of  the  king, 
he  was  banished  to  Flanders  in  956  where  he  first 
learned  of  St.  Benedict's  rule.  Two  years  later, 
however,  he  was  recalled  to  England  and  soon  ap- 
pointed Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Then  he  went  to 
Rome  to  receive  the  pallium  and,  returning  to  his  native 
land,  put  himself  at  the  head  of  the  reform  party.  He 
sought  to  replace  the  seculars  by  monks,  to  introduce 
the  Benedictine  rule,  to  enforce  celibacy,  to  prevent 
concubinage,  to  require  all  priests  to  learn  trades,  and 
to  forbid  the  clergy  to  hunt,  hawk,  play  dice,  get 
drunk,  and  scold. 

The  monastery  of  Clugny  grew  out  of  the  urgent 
need  of  monastic  reform.  It  was  founded  in  910  by 
Duke  William  of  Aquitaine  to  honour  Peter  and  Paul 
and  was  put  under  the  immediate  control  and  direction 
of  the  Pope. l  Bruno  (d.  927)  was  made  the  first  abbot. 
He  was  a  Burgundian  who  had  already  gained  renown 
as  a  monastic  leader.  A  modified  St.  Benedict's  rule 
was  introduced  into  the  new  monastery  which  abso- 
lutely forbade  the  possession  of  private  property,  pro- 
hibited the  eating  of  quadrupeds,  enforced  a  silence 
which  resulted  in  the  development  of  a  sign  language, 
required  psalm  singing  and  Bible  reading,  and  de- 
manded unquestioned  obedience.  Before  Bruno's  death 
six  cloisters  had  been  founded.  Odo  (927-941) ,  a  pupil 
and  follower  of  Bruno,  succeeded  him. 2  He  was 
a  man  of  great  energy  and  unusual  spirituality,  and 

1  Henderson,  329;  Ogg,  §42. 

2  Maitland,  Dark  Ages. 


Prepc  rations  for  Hildebrand  429 

outlined  the  literary  work  of  the  order.  From  Pope 
John  XI.  he  obtained  the  permit  to  unite  more  cloisters 
under  his  rule  and  to  accept  monks  from  unreformed 
monasteries.  Before  his  death  he  had  restored  the 
ancient  cloister  life  in  countless  monasteries  over 
France  and  in  Italy.  Under  succeeding  abbots, 
Aymar  (941-948),  Majola  (948-994),  Odilo  (994-1048), 
and  Hugh  (1048-1109),  reforms  were  extended  to 
German  cloisters  and  to  English  monasteries;  social 
and  economic  reformatory  results  were  produced;  the 
Truce  of  God  was  promulgated ;  and  the  reform  spirit 
was  spread  throughout  the  Church,  particularly  in 
reference  to  simony,  celibacy,  and  concubinage,  and 
uncanonical  marriage  of  the  laity.  At  its  height 
Clugny  ruled  over  two  thousand  monasteries  and 
produced  such  Popes  as  Hildebrand,  Urban  II.,  and 
Pascal  II.  After  the  thirteenth  century  the  order  began 
to  decline  and  finally  the  French  Revolution  swept  it 
out  of  existence.1 

The  Camaldolites  grew  out  of  an  Italian  reform 
movement  independent  of  Clugny  though  no  doubt 
related  to  it.2  It  came  into  existence  at  the  end  of 
the  tenth  century  when  the  Clugniac  movement  had 
already  reformed  many  of  the  Italian  monasteries. 
The  fundamental  idea  of  this  order  was  to  reform 
the  monastic  evils  of  Italy  by  reviving  the  strictest 
form  of  ascetic  life.  The  hermit,  Simeon,  St.  Domini- 
cus  of  Foligno,  and  St.  Nilus  were  worthy,  inspiring 
examples.  Traditions  of  the  Greek  monastic  fathers 
still  lingered  in  southern  Italy  and  in  the  Apennines  land 
may  have  had  some  influence.     St.  Romould,  born  at 

1  Duckett,  Charters  and  Records  Illust.  of  the  Eng.  Foundations 
of  the  Ancient  Abbey  of  Clugny  (1077-1534). 

2  Migne,  vol.  144,  p.  953;  Mabillon,  iii.,  iv. 


43°     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaev?    Church 


Ravenna  in  950  of  a  rich  noble  family,  was  the  real 
founder.  After  leading  a  gay  youth,  at  the  age  of 
twenty,  he  entered  a  Benedictine  monastery  to  atone  for 
his  father's  sin  in  murdering  a  relative,  which  crime  he 
witnessed  with  his  own  eyes.  He  intended  to  remain 
only  forty  days  but  stayed  three  years,  yet  found  no 
peace  for  his  soul.  Then  he  turned  hermit,  practised 
the  severest  tortures  to  defeat  the  devil,  travelled 
from  place  to  place,  gained  great  fame,  had  a  crowd 
of  followers  wherever  he  went,  organised  them  and 
appointed  a  leader,  and  then  moved  on  to  a  new  field 
of  labour.  As  his  life  drew  near  its  close,  he  retired  to 
Camaldoli  in  the  Apennines,  and  hence  the  name  of 
the  place  was  given  to  his  order  (10 18).  To  govern 
these  little  bands  St.  Benedict's  rule,  modified  by 
eastern  asceticism,  was  used.  The  monks  lived  in  single 
cells,  but  had  a  common  meeting  place  for  worship  and 
for  eating.  Wine  and  meat  were  forbidden,  and  all  days 
except  Thursday  and  Sunday  were  fast  days.  The 
monks  were  barefooted  and  went  about  in  silence  with 
hair  and  beard  uncut,  performing  the  duties  of  farmers 
and  makers  of  nets  and  baskets.  Some  of  the  more 
ascetic  lived  for  years  without  leaving  their  cells.  They 
were  the  first  to  use  assistants  as  servants.  St. 
Romould  had  a  great  influence  on  his  age  and  was 
called  a  prophet  and  a  miracle  worker.  He  induced 
men  like  the  Doge  of  Venice  to  take  up  the  monastic 
life  and  was  visited  by  the  young  Otto  III.  (999).  He 
sent  missionaries  to  Russia  and  Poland,  and  went  him- 
self to  Hungary  with  twenty-four  monks,  but  was 
compelled  by  illness  to  return  to  Italy.  He  preached 
with  great  power  against  the  immoral,  simoniacal, 
and  wicked  clergy,  the  monastic  abuses,  simony,  and 
the  marriage  of  churchmen.     After  his  death  in  1027, 


Preparations  for  Hildebrand  431 


his  work  was  carried  on  by  his  disciples  and  the  order 
has  lived  on  through  the  varying  vicissitudes  of  succeed- 
ing centuries.  * 

The  Vallombrosians  originated  in  Tuscany  in  1040 
as  an  outgrowth  of  the  Camaldolian  reform  movement. 
St.  John  Gualbert,  the  scion  of  a  noble  Florentine 
family,  was  the  founder.  Sent  by  his  father  to  kill  the 
murderer  of  his  brother,  he  spared  his  life,  when  he 
made  the  sign  of  the  cross  with  his  arms.  On  his 
return  to  Florence,  entering  the  little  Church  of  San 
Miniato  to  pray  before  an  image  of  Jesus,  the  figure 
nodded  its  head  in  approval  of  his  act  of  mercy.  As 
a  result  in  1038  he  became  a  monk  and  soon  joined  St. 
Romould.  Two  years  later  he  determined  to  found  an 
order  of  his  own  at  Vallombrosa.  Followers  enough 
came  to  begin  his  organisation  and  they  were  put  under 
St.  Benedict's  rule  modified  to  meet  his  ideas.  Candi- 
dates were  put  on  a  year's  probation  and  members  were 
divided  into  three  classes, — the  religious,  the  serving 
brethren,  and  the  laity.  When  he  died  in  1073,  seven 
cloisters  had  been  established  in  Italy,  and  when  the 
founder  was  made  a  saint  in  11 93  they  numbered 
sixty. 

The  monastery  of  Hirshau  was  established  in  the 
Black  Forest  of  Germany. 2  William  of  Bavaria  began 
the  reformation  there  in  1065  by  freeing  the  monastery 
from  secular  control,  drawing  up  a  constitution  for  it 
on  reform  lines,  patterning  its  policy  after  the  Clugniac 
movement,  and  introducing  lay  brethren.  From 
Hirshau  reformation  spread  over  a  large  part  of  Ger- 

1  Mabillon,  Ann.  Ord.  Benedict.,  iii.,  iv.,  gives  his  life  by  Peter 
Damiani;  Sachur,  Die  Cluniozenser  bis  zur  Mitte  des  nth  Jahrh.; 
Heimbucher,  Die  Orden  u.  Kongregat.  der  Kath.  Kirche. 

2  Mon.  Ger.  Hist.,  xii.,  209. 


432     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

many,  and  these  reform  cloisters  strongly  supported 
the  lofty  programme  of  Gregory  VII. l 

Peter  Damiani  was  born  in  Ravenna  of  poor  parents 
in  1006  and  early  left  an  orphan.  As  a  boy  he  had  a 
hard  life,  but  was  educated  by  a  brother  at  Ravenna, 
Faenza,  and  Parma.  Then  he  became  a  teacher  and 
gained  wealth  and  fame  as  an  instructor  in  grammar  and 
rhetoric  at  Ravenna.  Suddenly  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
nine  resolving  to  become  a  monk,  he  entered  a  monas- 
tery at  Fonte  Avellano  where  he  excelled  the  old  monks 
in  intemperate  tortures,  studied  the  Scriptures  and 
preached,  and  wrote  a  biography  of  St.  Romould. 
At  the  age  of  thirty-seven  he  was  chosen  abbot  and 
then  introduced  St.  Romould's  Benedictine  rule,  which 
made  fasting  and  torture  a  regular  system.  Each 
psalm  was  to  be  recited  accompanied  by  one  hundred 
lashes  on  the  bare  back  and  the  whole  psalter  with  one 
thousand  five  hundred  lashes.  This  practice  soon 
became  a  regular  craze  and  was  taken  up  later  by  the 
Dominicans,  the  Franciscans,  and  the  Flagellants. 
He  permitted  his  monks  to  read  the  Scriptures  and 
the  Fathers,  encouraged  them  in  performing  hand  work, 
but  cut  them  off  wholly  from  the  world.  He  soon 
became  the  recognised  leader  of  the  reform  party  in 
Europe.  He  denounced  his  age  as  worse  than  that  of 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah;  demanded  a  reformation  of 
monasteries,  of  all  the  clergy,  and  of  the  Church  in 
general ;  dedicated  his  life  to  a  crusade  against  simony 
and  marriage  of  the  clergy;  and  condemned  in  the 
clergy  the  practice  of  bearing  arms  as  Leo  IX.  did  in 
driving  back  the  Normans  (1053).  Damiani  was  too 
big  a  man  to  remain  in  obscurity,  hence  he  became 

»  Giseke,  Die  Hirschauer  wdrend  des  Investtiurstreites,  1883. 


Hildebrand's  Reform  Preparations     433 


Bishop  of  Ostia  and  in  1058  was  made  Cardinal.  In 
the  papal  court  he  was  a  very  prominent  personage, 
serving  as  legate  on  many  an  important  mission,  and  in 
106 1  was  almost  chosen  Pope.  He  was  the  spiritual 
counsellor  and  censor  of  seven  Hildebrandine  popes, 
and  called  himself  the  "Lord  of  the  Pope"  and  Hilde- 
brand's "Holy  Satan."  He  won  the  confidence  of  Henry 
III.  and  exercised  great  control  over  Henry  IV.  He  died 
in  1072  just  a  year  before  Hildebrand  became  Pope.  * 

.Next  to  Peter  Damiani  both  in  time  and  importance 
comes  Hildebrand.  From  the  scanty  sources  concern- 
ing his  youth  it  is  known  that  he  was  born  in  Tuscany 
at  Saona  about  1020  of  parents  in  humble  circum- 
stances. His  father's  name  was  Bonizo,  but  whether 
he  was  of  Teutonic  or  Roman  race,  or  whether  his 
occupation  was  that  of  a  carpenter,  a  farmer,  or  a 
goatherd,  are  unsettled  questions.  His  mother  is 
unknown,  but  she  had  a  brother  who  was  Abbot  of  St. 
Mary's  on  the  Aventine  in  Rome  and  one  of  the  twenty 
churchmen  who  helped  the  Pope  celebrate  mass.  To 
that  uncle's  monastery  in  the  Eternal  City  young 
Hildebrand  was  early  sent  and  there  studied  Latin, 
rhetoric,  mathematics,  music,  dialectics,  and  the  Church 
Fathers.  There  too  he  became  imbued  with  the 
venerableness  of  Holy  Rome  and  the  sacred  authority 
of  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter,  so  that  in  the  stormy  days  of 
his  old  age  he  could  write  that  St.  Peter  had  nourished 
him  from  childhood.  Under  these  surroundings  it  was 
but  natural  that  he  should  decide  to  be  a  monk. 
Soon  he  was  driven  to  ascetic  severities,  probably  by  the 
corruptions  and  abuses  thrust  upon  him  from  all  sides. 

1  Migne,  vol.    144,  p.    145;    Vagler,  Peter  Damiani;  Neukirch; 
Das  Leben  des  Peter  Damiani;  Neander,  iii.,  382,  397;  Hefele,  iv.; 
Cooper,  Flagellation  and  the  Flagellants;  Schaff,  iv.,  787. 
28 


434     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


In  this  monastery  he  met  such  men  as  Odilo,  Abbot  of 
Clugny,  leader  of  the  reform  movement  in  France,  who 
was  accustomed  to  make  St.  Mary's  his  stopping  place 
when  in  Rome ;  Archbishop  Laurentius  of  Amain,  who 
may  have  taught  him  the  classics;  and  Archpresbyter 
John  Gratian,  a  teacher  in  St.  Mary's,  who  later  pur- 
chased the  papal  crown  and  became  Pope  Gregory  VI. 

Abbot  Odilo,  favourably  impressed  with  the  young 
monk's  ability  and  piety,  took  him  to  Clugny,  where 
he  completed  his  studies,  practised  the  severe  discipline 
of  the  Benedictines,  and  became  grave  and  puritanical. 
The  life  of  a  monk  probably  affected  Hildebrand  as 
later  it  did  Luther.  He  seems  to  have  travelled  some 
in  Germany — perhaps  even  visited  the  court  of  Henry 
III.  for  his  order.  He  may  have  completed  his  novitiate 
at  Clugny.  From  this  reform  atmosphere  Hildebrand 
returned  to  Rome  when  three  Popes  were  claiming 
the  apostolic  seat  and  the  Papacy  was  in  its  depths  of 
humiliation.  Gregory  VI.,  one  of  the  trio,  Hilde- 
brand's  old  teacher,  who  had  bought  the  office  for 
iooo  pounds  in  silver,  made  the  young  monk  his  chap- 
lain. Soon  he  saw  the  German  Emperor,  Henry  III., 
come  to  Rome,  hold  a  council,  depose  the  three  Popes, 
exile  his  master  to  a  German  monastery,  and  in  1046 
elect  a  new  Pontiff.  True  to  his  unfortunate  friend, 
Hildebrand  followed  him  to  Germany  to  see  him  die 
in  1048  of  a  broken  heart  and  then,  apparently,  he 
returned  to  Clugny.1 

Pope  Clement  II.,  raised  to  the  papal  chair  by  Henry 
III.  (1046),  died  within  a  year  and  DamasusII.  followed 
him  m  twenty-three  days.  The  Roman  people  then 
prayed  the  Emperor  to  name  a  new  papal  sovereign  and 
he  chose  his  cousin  Bruno  Pope  in  the  Diet  of  Worms 

1  Cf.  Greenwood,  bk.  ix.,  ch.  4. 


Hildebrand's  Reform  Preparations     435 


in  1048  and  had  him  assume  the  pontifical  insignia. 
This  was  a  new  method  of  election  and  certainly  a 
dangerous  precedent.  Bruno  was  a  German,  born  at 
Alsace  in  1002,  well  educated  and  at  twenty-four  elected 
Bishop  of  Toul.  He  joined  the  Clugniac  reform  party 
and  enforced  reformation  in  his  diocese.  He  served 
the  German  king  on  several  delicate  secular  missions, 
particularly  to  Burgundy  and  France,  and  gained  a 
reputation  as  a  good,  clever,  honest,  brave,  devout 
man.  When  elected  to  this  high  office  he  was  a  matured 
man,  handsome,  tall  and  stately,  with  a  strong  frank 
face,  and  was  a  general  favourite.  As  a  pilgrim  he 
had  often  gone  to  Rome  and  was  familiar  with  the 
conditions  there.  His  biographer  said  of  the  times: 
"The  World  lay  in  wickedness;  holiness  had  disap- 
^  neared;  justice  had  perished;  truth  had  been  buried; 
^,»sSimon  Magnus  lorded  it  over  the  Church,  whose 
'  bishops  and  persist  were  given  to  luxury  and  forni- 
cation."1 In  Rome  the  churches  were  neglected  and 
in  ruins,  sheep  and  cattle  went  in  and  out  of  the 
broken  doors,  and  the  monks  and  clergy  were  steeped 
in  immorality.2 

Bruno  asked  Hildebrand,  who  appears  to  have  been 
at  the  Diet  of  Wrorms,  to  go  with  him  to  Rome,  but 
that  austere  monk  replied,  "I  cannot  accompany 
you  because,  without  canonical  institution,  and  by  the 
royal  and  secular  power  alone,  you  are  going  to  seize 
upon  the  Roman  Church."  If  that  statement  is  cor- 
rect, it  shows  Hildebrand's  ideas  of  the  relation  of 
Church  and  state  twenty -five  years  before  he  became 
Pope.  Bruno  was  persuaded,  put  off  the  papal  robes, 
and  declared  that  he  would  not  accept  the  papal  crown 

»  Bruno,  Vita  S.  Leonis  IX. 
2  Mansi,  xix.,  705. 


436     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


save  by  the  free  election  of  the  Roman  clergy  and 
people.  Then  the  two  started  for  Rome  as  barefooted 
pilgrims  and  many  a  legendary  tale  has  grown  up 
about  that  journey,  which  took  two  months.  At  length 
reaching  Rome,  these  two  pious  churchmen  were  heart- 
ily welcomed  by  the  Romans  and  Bruno  was  chosen 
Pope  in  a  great  gathering  in  1049  and  coronated  as 
Leo  IX. 

With  Leo  IX.  began  that  new  policy  of  reformation 
and  purification  of  which  Hildebrand  was  the  genius 
and  Innocent  III.  executor.  The  spirit  of  the  Pseudo- 
Isidorian  Decretals  and  of  Clugny  were  to  be  united 
and  to  predominate.  To  reform  the  curia  was  the 
first  step  of  the  new  Pope.  He  did  this  by  surrounding 
himself  with  good  men  like  Hildebrand,  Peter  Damiani, 
Cardinal  Humbert,  and  Archbishop  Halimand  of 
Lyons.  His  next  move  was  to  abolish  the  flagrant 
evils  in  the  Church  such  as  simony,  the  violation  of 
celibacy,  unjust  tithing  of  the  laity,  uncanonical  mar- 
riages of  the  laity,  and  lay  investiture.  These  various 
reforms  were  to  be  inaugurated  through  Church  synods, 
such  as  the  annual  Easter  synods  in  Rome,  national 
synods,  and  local  synods.  Leo  IX.  presided  over  eleven 
of  these  synods  in  person  and  travelled  incessantly 
through  Italy,  France,  and  Germany  to  enforce  the 
reforms,  to  root  out  heresy,  to  settle  disputes,  to  make 
appointments,  and  to  manage  Church  affairs.  To 
enforce  his  measures  in  southern  Italy  he  led  an  army 
of  Italians  and  Germans  against  the  Normans  in  1053, 
but  was  defeated  and  taken  prisoner,  whereupon  he 
put  all  the  Normans  under  the  ban.  They  begged  their 
sacred  captive  to  remove  the  dreaded  curse  but  he 
refused  until  they  should  kiss  his  feet  and  recognise 
the   rights   of  the   Church.     When  he   died  in   1054, 


Hildebrand's  Reform  Preparations     43  7 


beloved  by  all  Christendom,  he  had  accomplished  more 
in  the  way  of  reformation  than  any  Pope  since  Nicholas 
I.  and  he  left  behind  him  a  new  religious  enthusiasm 
soon  to  be  felt  all  over  Europe. l 

Leo  IX.  had  entrusted  papal  affairs  to  Hildebrand 
until  a  new  Pope  should  be  elected,  hence  all  eyes  were 
on  him  and  his  friends  wanted  to  make  him  Supreme 
Pontiff.  But  he  saw  the  time  was  not  ripe  for  his 
work  and  refused.  Hildebrand  then  headed  a  dele- 
gation to  ask  the  Emperor  Henry  III.  to  confirm 
the  nomination  of  Gebhard,  Bishop  of  Eichstadt,  a 
friend  and  relative.  After  the  imperial  nomination  at 
Mainz,  Gebhard  went  to  Rome,  was  there  elected  in  due 
canonical  form  as  Pope  Victor  II.  (1055),  and  im- 
mediately took  up  Hildebrand's  sweeping  reform  pol- 
icy. 2  Formerly  he  had  advocated  a  national  Church 
and  was  a  master  of  Clugniac  politics.  Now,  however, 
he  accepted  the  papal  theory  in  its  entirety.  With  the 
Emperor  he  held  a  council  at  Florence  which  forbade 
the  alienation  of  Church  property,  enacted  rules  of 
discipline,  and  determined  matters  of  doctrine.3  To 
cure  abuses  of  the  French  clergy  he  sent  Hildebrand  to 
France,  who  succeeded  in  humbling  the  bishops  guilty 
of  simony.4  Victor  II.  himself  held  a  council  at  Tours 
to  discuss  the  imperial  claims  of  Ferdinand  the  Great 
of  Spain  and  Henry  III.  of  Germany,  thus  assuming 
that  it  was  his  prerogative  to  act  in  the  capacity  of 
arbiter.  He  went  to  Germany  in  1056  to  see  Henry 
III.  die,  to  hold  the  centrifugal  forces  in  check  in 
behalf  of  Henry  IV.,  and  to  thwart  the  ambition  of 

1  A  large  number  of  legends  soon  sprang  up  about  Leo  IX. 

2  Bonizo,  ii.,  804;  Muratori,  iv.,  403. 

3  Harduin,  vi.,  1039. 

4  Ibid.,  Bonizo,  806. 


438     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Mamno  of  Cologne  and  Adelbert  of  Bremen  to  establish 
a  northern  patriarchate.  The  following  year  he  re- 
turned to  Italy  and  there  soon  died  (1057),  beloved 
throughout  all  Christendom. 

Five  days  after  the  death  of  Victor  II.  the  Romans, 
not  waiting  for  the  return  of  Hildebrand,  who  was  still 
absent  on  papal  business,  chose  Cardinal  Frederick  of 
Lorraine  Pope  and  jubilantly  inaugurated  him  (Aug.  2, 
105  7) .  The  new  Pontiff,  who  took  the  name  of  Stephen 
IX.,  was  an  old  enemy  of  Henry  III.,  had  been  made 
Cardinal  and  Chancellor  by  Leo  IX.,  had  been  sent  to 
Constantinople  to  heal  the  breach  between  the  East 
and  the  West  (1054),  and  had  been  appointed  Abbot  of 
Monte  Casino  (1057).1  Since  he  was  elected  without 
the  consent  of  the  German  imperial  party,  Hildebrand, 
elevated  to  the  dignity  of  cardinal -archdeacon,  was 
sent  north  to  appease  the  Queen  Regent.  Stephen  IX. 
manifested  his  sincere  desire  to  carry  forward  the  work 
of  reformation.  Allied  with  him  to  accomplish  this 
work  were  Hildebrand,  the  greatest  man  in  Rome, 
and  Damiani,  the  leader  of  the  reform  party,  whom  he 
appointed  Cardinal-Bishop  of  Ostia.  This  trio  no  doubt 
would  have  made  great  headway  in  the  reform  pro- 
pagandism  had  not  the  Pope  died  so  soon  (Mar.  29, 
1058).  Before  death  stilled  his  tongue,  however, 
he  made  his  court  promise  not  to  elect  a  successor 
without  the  advice  of  Hildebrand,  who  was  still  absent 
in  Germany. 

The  party  of  nobles  in  Rome,  not  heeding  the  wishes 
of  Stephen  IX.,  immediately  elected  as  Pope  Benedict 
X.,  and  every  friend  of  reform  was  driven  from  the 
city.     Hildebrand   upon   returning  to   Rome   secured 

1  Greenwood,  bk.  x.,  ch.  1,  p.   156. 


Hildebrand's  Reform  Preparations     439 


the  elevation  of  Gerhard,  Bishop  of  Florence,  to  the 
papal  chair  and  inaugurated  him  without  difficulty, 
whereupon  Benedict  X.  surrendered  and  was  pardoned, 
though  degraded  and  confined  for  life  within  the 
precincts  of  St.  Maria  Maggiore. «  The  new  Pope, 
Nicholas  II.,  practically  allowed  Tlildebrand  to 
dictate  his  policy.  First  he  sought  to  free  the 
Church  from  imperial  domination  and  to  elevate  it 
above  the  state.  The  death  of  Henry  III.  (1056) 
and  the  coronation  of  his  son  of  six  as  Henry  IV. 
removed  a  powerful  barrier  to  that  object.  Germany 
was  divided  into  an  imperial  and  anti -imperial  party. 
In  this  condition  Italian  influence  could  be  used  as 
the  determining  factor  in  German  politics,  hence  the 
states  of  Italy  were  forced  to  recognise  the  over- 
sovereignty  of  the  Pope. 

In  the  next  place  Nicholas  II.  endeavoured  to  regulate 
the  papal  elections  :^o  as  to  prevent  a  repetition  of  the 
election  of  Benedict  X.  and  at  the  same  time  to  eliminate 
the  influence  of  the  Emperor.  The  Lateran  Council 
held  April  13,  1059,  attended  by  the  Pope  and  one 
hundred  and  thirteen  bishops,2  many  abbots,  and  a 
vast  concourse  of  priests  and  deacons,  after  condemning 
Benedict  X.,  prohibiting  simony,  denouncing  lay 
investiture,  and  decreeing  celibacy  to  be  the  law  of 
the  Church,  created  the  College  of  Cardinals.3  The 
election  of  the  Pope  was  now  put  into  the  hands  of  the 
Roman  cardinal -bishops,  4  who  were  to  submit  their 
nominee  to  the  lower  clergy  and  the  people  for  approval. 

1  Greenwood,  bk.  x.,  ch.  i,  p.  160. 

2  Henderson,  361. 

3  Mansi,  xix.,  898. 

*  Bowden,  i.,  200;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  59;  Henderson, 
361 ;  Alzog,  §190. 


44-o    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


This  practically  excluded  both  the  Roman  nobles  and 
the  Roman  Emperor.  This  edict  was  the  greatest 
revolution  ever  attempted  in  the  hierarchy.  It  was 
an  effort  to  give  the  Papacy  a  constitution  which 
would  make  it  independent.  An  election  by  any 
hands  but  the  cardinals'  could  now  be  called  unconsti- 
tutional or  uncanonical.  And  any  person  who  at- 
tempted to  resist  or  impugn  the  regulation  was  to  be 
smitten  with  an  awful  curse  : 

Let  him  be  damned  by  anathema  and  excommunication, 
and  be  counted  among  the  impious  in  the  resurrection  of 
condemnation;  may  the  wrath  of  Father,  Son  and  Holy 
Ghost,  and  the  fury  of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul, 
whose  Church  he  shall  dare  to  disturb,  be  poured  out  upon 
him  in  this  life  and  in  the  life  to  come ;  may  his  habitation  be 
made  desolate,  so  that  there  may  be  none  to  inhabit  his 
tents;  may  his  children  be  made  orphans,  and  his  wife 
a  widow;  he  and  his  sons;  and  may  he  beg  his  bread,  and 
be  driven  out  of  his  habitation ;  may  the  usurer  consume 
his  substance,  and  the  stranger  reap  the  fruit  of  his  labours ; 
may  the  world  be  at  war  with  him,  and  all  the  elements 
array  themselves  against  him;  and  may  the  merits  of  all 
the  saints  at  rest  confound  him,  and  even  in  this  life 
hold  the  sword  of  vengeance  suspended  over  him.  * 

The  history  of  the  cardinals  is  very  interesting. 
The  word  cardinal  seems  to  come  from  cardo,  a  hinge, 
and  contains  the  idea  of  principal  or  important. 2  The 
term  was  early  applied  tc  the  priests  of  the  first  dioceses 
in  Rome  and  in  308  there  were  twenty-five  in  the  Eter- 
nal City.  Under  Gregory  I.  (604)  the  word  was  plainly 
and  commonly  used.  Stephen  IV.  in  771  extended 
the  title  to  suburban  dioceses.      Anastasius'  life  of  Leo 

1  Greenwood,  bk.  x.,  ch.  1,  pp.  162,  163. 

2  Alzog,  §194. 


Hildebrand's  Reform  Preparations    441 


III.  (died  816)  seems  to  indicate  the  germs  of  a  College 
of  Cardinals.  It  was  not,  however,  until  the  time 
of  Nicholas  II.  that  the  institution  was  definitely 
created.  The  number  of  cardinals  varied  greatly — 
thirty  in  the  twelfth  century,  seven  in  the  thirteenth 
century,  twenty-four  by  the  act  of  the  Council  of  Basle, 
thirteen  in  15 16,  seventy-six  in  1559,  and  finally  Sixtus 
V.  fixed  the  number  once  for  all  at  seventy  to  corre- 
spond with  the  seventy  elders  of  Israel. i  The  number, 
however,  was  seldom  complete. 

The  paternal  solicitude  and  indefatigable  labours  of 
Nicholas  II.  for  the  restoration  and  maintenance  of 
the  unity  and  authority  of  the  Church  met  with  un- 
expected success.  All  western  Europe,  even  distant 
countries  like  Denmark,  Norway,  Sweden,  and  Iceland, 
felt  the  firm  hand  of  this  strong  Pope.  In  Milan  Peter 
Damiani  humbled  the  mighty  archbishop  and  lesser 
ecclesiastics  to  repentance  for  simony  and  immorality. 
Robert  Guiscard,  King  of  the  Normans,  acknowledged 
papal  suzerainty.2  From  many  standpoints  he  must 
be  accounted  the  greatest  Pope  between  Gregory  the 
Great  and  Gregory  VII. 

The  death  of  Nicholas  II.  (106 1)  gave  the  College  of 
Cardinals  an  opportunity  to  employ  the  new  method 
of  electing  the  Pope.  Hildebrand  first  sent  Cardinal 
Stephen  as  a  messenger  to  the  Empress  Regent  to  secure 
her  approval  of  the  election,  but  she  refused  to  receive 
him  because  she  felt  that  the  royal  prerogatives  had  been 
encroached  upon  by  the  Lateran  Council  and  besides 
she  hoped  to  carry  out  her  own  plans  of  election. 
Hildebrand,  after  waiting  some  time,  resolved  to  take 
the  initiative  and  summoned  the  College  of  Cardinals. 

1  Bull  Postquam,  1585. 

2  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  58. 


442     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  right  of  the  young  king  was  tacitly  waived  and  a 
new  Pope  called  Alexander  II.  elected.     The  Empress 
called  a  counter-council  at  Basle  in  which  the  regula- 
tion creating  the   College   of  Cardinals  was  revoked, 
the  election  of  Alexander  II.  was  declared  null,  and  in 
his  place  the  Bishop  of  Parma  was  made  Pope  Honorius 
II.     The  German  Pope  attempted  to  take  Rome  by 
force   (April,   1062),  did  gain  an  entry,  but  was  soon 
defeated  by  Godfrey  of  Tuscany  and  forced  to  flee. 
A  civil  revolt  in  Germany  soon  led  to  the  recognition 
of   Alexander   II.    and   the   Empress   Regent   sought 
absolution  from  him  and  shortly  afterwards  entered 
a  Roman  convent.     The  continued   quarrel  between 
these  two  rival  claimants  of  St.  Peter's  Seat  gave  a 
momentary  check  to  reformation  in  the  Church.     But 
the  battle  over  papal  election  had  been  won.     The 
Church  was  no  longer  ruled  by  the  state.     Truly  could 
it  be  said  of  Hildebrand  "he  found  the  Church  a  hand- 
maid and  left  her  free."     The  contest  over  simony,  lay 
investiture,  and    celibacy,  however,   remained    to  be 
carried  on  by  the  great  successor  of  Alexander  II. 
It  was  this  same  Pope  Alexander  II.  who  gave  William 
of  Normandy  the  right  to  assume  the  crown  of  Eng- 
land, for  which  he  exacted  a  yearly  tribute.     He  also 
appointed  the  archbishops  for  England.      Lanfranc  of 
Canterbury  ably  seconded  the  reformatory  exertions 
of  the  Pope  and  set  himself  firmly  against  the  sale  of 
benefices  and  the  unchastity  of  the  clergy.     NiefaolagAM 
II.  likewise  declared  that  papal  bulls  had  the  same 
force  as  acts  of  councils — the  first  expression  of  that 
kind.     Peter  Damiani  was  sent  into  France  to  correct 
the  morals  of  the  clergy  and  to  enforce  discipline  in 
the  Church.     Later  he  made  a  similar  trip  to  Germany. 
Had  not  death  claimed  Nicholas- so  soon  (Apr.  21,  1073) 


Hildebrand's  Reform  Preparations     443 


he  would  probably  have  carried  out  his  intentions  to 
reform  the  wicked  young  German  king,  who  was 
called  to  Rome  to  answer  for  his  conduct,  and  to 
punish  his  councillors,  whom  he  did  excommunicate. 
He  bequeathed  that  difficult  work,  however,  to  one 
more  able  than  he  for  its  accomplishment. 

Charles  the  Great  and  Otto  the  Great  both  called 
councils  in  Rome  to  try  Popes.  But  now  the  Pope 
has  attained  such  a  pre-eminence  that  he  cites  the 
Emperor  to  appear  before  him  to  justify  his  conduct. 
Verily  the  Papacy,  with  the  aid  of  Damiani  and  Hilde- 
brand,  had  got  out  of  the  quagmire  which  almost 
engulfed  it  in  the  tenth  and  the  eleventh  centuries. 
At  the  same  time  the  imperial  right  to  choose  Popes, 
which  had  so  long  been  exercised  and  which  had  been 
recognised  again  and  again  by  the  Popes  themselves, 
was  taken  out  of  the  Emperor's  hands  and  entirely 
controlled  by  the  Roman  cardinals. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

i. — Henderson,  E.  F.,  Select  Historical  Documents 

of  the  Middle  Ages.     N.  Y.,  1892. 
2. — Gee,    H.,  and    Hardy,    W.    J.,    Documents 

Illustrative  of  English  Church  History.     Lond. , 

1896. 
3. — Neale,   J.   M.,   Medieval  Preachers.     Lond., 

1856. 
4. — Thatcher    and    McNeal,    Source    Book    for 

Mediceval  History.     N.    Y.,  1905. 

Bibliographical  Note : — The  primary  material  for 
this  subject  is  practically  all  in  Latin.  The 
most  valuable  collections  are :  Migne,  Patrolo- 
gia,  vols.  119-145;  Pertz,  Monumenta; 
Mansi,  Sacrorum  Conciliorum;  Rolls  Series; 
Muratori;  Bouquet. 


444    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


B—  SECONDARY: 
I. — special: 

i. — Baring-Gould,  S.,  Lives  of  the  Saints.     Lond., 

1897-8.     15  vols. 
2. — Bowden,    J.    W.,    Life    and    Pontificate    of 
Gregory     VII.     2     vols.     Lond.,     1840.     I., 

73-283- 
3. — Bryce,  J.,  The  Holy  Roman  Empire.     Various 

eds.     Rev.  ed.,  1904. 
4. — Butler,  A.,  Lives  of  the  Fathers,  Martyrs,  and 

Saints.     Dub.,  1866.     12  vols. 
5. — Fisher,  H.,  The  Medieval  Empire. 
6. — Greenwood,  A.,  The  Empire  and  the  Papacy 

in  the  Middle  Ages. 
7. — Greenwood,  T.,  Cathedra  Petri.     Ch.  4. 
8. — Greisley,    Sir    R.,    Life    and    Pontificate    of 

Gregory  VII.     Lond.,  1832.     Introduction. 
9. — Lea,   H.   C,  History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy. 
Rev.  ed. 
10. — Maitland,    S.    R.,    The  Dark  Ages.     Lond., 

1889. 
11. — Montalembert,  Count  de,  The  Monks  of  the 

West.     Lond.,  1896.     7  vols. 
12. — Stephens,    W.    R.  W.,  Hildebrand  and  His 

Times.     N.  Y.,  1888. 
1 3 . — Villemain,  A.  F. ,  Life  of  Gregory  VII.     Lond. , 

1874.     2  vols. 
14. — Vincent,    M.    R.,    The   Age   of   Hildebrand. 
N.  Y.,  1896. 
II. — general: 

Adams,  ch.  10.  Allen,  ii.,  ch.  3.  Alzog,  ii., 
228-241.  Bouzique,  ii.,  bk.  3,  ch.  1.  Butler, 
ch.  63-65.  Creighton,  i.,  ch.  1,  pp.  11-16.  Dol- 
linger,  iii.,  ch.  3,  sec.  2-3;  ch.  5.  Emerton,  ch. 
7.  Fisher,  pd.  5,  ch.  3.  Foulkes,  ch.  11. 
Gieseler.  Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  41,  42.  Guericke. 
Hase,  sec.  177-180.  Hurst,  i.,  473,  701,  739, 
753.  Jennings,  i.,  ch.  10;  ii.,  ch.  11.  Kurtz, 
sec.  92,  96,  97,  98.  Milman,  ii.,  bk.  5,  p.  409. 
Milner,  cent.  9,  ch.  3;  cent.  11,  ch.  2;  cent.  12, 
cent.  13.  Moeller.  Neander,  iii.,  346-456. 
Newman.  Riddle,  ii.,  ch.  4,  5.  Robertson, 
bk.  4,  ch.  6;  bk.  5,  ch.  1.  Schaff,  pd.  4,  ch. 
4,  sec.  63-66.     Tout,  ch.  5. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

GREGORY   VII.    AND   HIS    WORK 

Outline:  I. — Condition  of  the  Church  in  1073.     II. — Election 

of    Hildebrand   as    Pope.  III. — Gregory   VII. 's    matured    papal 

theory  and  reform  ideas.  IV. — His  efforts  to  realise  his  ideals. 

V. — The  investiture  strife.  VI. — Conclusions.     VII. — Sources. 

IN  1073  the  Church  had  been  raised  from  the  lowest 
condition  to  a  comparatively  high  moral  plane  by 
the  imperial  reforms,  the  labours  of  earnest  German 
Popes,  the  Clugniac  reformation,  and  the  Hildebran- 
dine  Popes.  The  papal  crown  was  no  longer  the  play- 
thing of  a  Roman  noble,  nor  the  tool  of  the  German 
Emperor,  but  had  become  largely  independent  of 
both  and  a  mighty  power  in  Europe.  This  change  was 
due  to  the  character  of  the  Emperors  and  Popes,  to  the 
religious  enthusiasm  of  the  age,  to  the  political  con- 
fusion in  Germany,  and  to  the  labours  of  Hildebrand, 
particularly  in  creating  the  College  of  Cardinals. 
A  positive  reform  movement  had  also  been  started  in 
the  Church,  but  it  remained  to  be  continued  and 
completed.  The  time,  therefore,  seemed  ripe  for  the 
work  of  a  great  Pope  like  Hildebrand. 

For  twenty-five  years  Hildebrand  had  been  the 
power  behind  the  papal  throne.  He  had  largely 
moulded  the  policy  of  eight  successive  Popes,  he  was 
the  recognised  champion  of  reformation  in  the  Church, 
he  had  developed  the  constitution  of  the  Papacy, 
he  had  managed  the  finances  of  Rome,  he  had  become 

445 


446      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  greatest  statesman  and  the  shrewdest  churchman 
in  Europe,  and  he  had  formed  a  powerful  party  to 
champion  his  ideas. 

Alexander  II.  breathed  his  last  April  21,  1073. 
Hildebrand  directed  that  the  next  three  days  should 
be  devoted  to  fasting,  charity,  and  prayer,  while  the 
dead  Pontiff  was  being  interred,  after  which  the  regular 
election  of  a  Pope  would  follow.  The  next  day  the 
funeral  rites  were  being  celebrated  in  the  old  church 
of  St.  John  Lateran.  The  ancient  structure  was 
crowded  to  overflowing  and  Hildebrand,  as  archdea- 
con, was  conducting  the  services,  when  suddenly  a  cry 
burst  forth  from  the  crowd,  "Hildebrand,  Hildebrand 
shall  be  our  Pope.  St.  Peter  chooses  our  Archdeacon 
Hildebrand."  Rushing  to  the  pulpit,  Hildebrand  im- 
plored silence,  but  his  voice  was  drowned  in  the  uproar. 

Then  Cardinal  Hugo  came  forward,  and  said: 

Well  know  ye,  beloved  brethren,  that  since  the  days  of 
the  blessed  Leo,  this  tried  and  prudent  archdeacon  has 
exalted  the  Roman  See  and  delivered  this  city  from  many 
perils.  Wherefore,  since  we  cannot  find  any  one  better 
qualified  for  the  government  of  the  Church,  or  the  pro- 
tection of  the  city,  we,  the  bishops  and  archbishops,  with 
one  voice  elect  him  as  pastor  and  bishop  of  your  souls. 

The  crowd  approved  by  shouting,  "It  is  the  will  of  St. 
Peter.  Hildebrand  is  Pope."1  Then  the  cardinals 
led  the  popular  favourite,  protesting  still  and  in  tears, 
to  the  throne  of  St.  Peter,  and  invested  him  with  the 
scarlet  robe  and  the  tiara  as  Gregory  VII.  Like  Charles 
the  Great  in  800,  Gregory  VII.  pretended  to  be  greatly 
surprised  at  this  election,  which  certainly  was  irregular, 
if  not  uncanonical,  because  the  customary  three  days 

1  Muratori,  iii.,  304. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  447 


had  not  yet  elapsed,  the  people  had  nominated  and 
the  cardinals  had  ratified — a  complete  reversal  of  the 
decree  of  1059, — and  the  Emperor  had  not  been  con- 
sulted at  all. 

Hildebrand  immediately  assumed  all  the  duties  of 
his  office,  but  at  the  same  time  wrote  to  Henry  IV.  stat- 
ing all  the  circumstances  attending  his  election  and 
saying  that  he  would  refuse  consecration  until  the 
Emperor  should  approve  of  his  elevation. *  The 
assertions  that  he  asked  Henry  IV.  not  to  confirm  his 
election  and  that  he  threatened  to  punish  the  king  if 
made  Pope  are  very  improbable.2  Henry  IV.  was 
in  a  dilemma.  He  knew  that  Hildebrand  had  robbed 
him  of  the  rights  enjoyed  by  his  father  and  predecessors ; 
consequently  the  German  nobles  and  simoniacal  bishops 
urged  him  to  annul  the  election  and  thus  nip  the  violence 
of  Hildebrand  in  the  bud.  He  realised  the  strength 
of  the  Hildebrandine  party,  on  the  other  hand,  and 
feared  the  results  of  an  open  rupture  with  it  in  the 
unsettled  condition  of  Germany.  The  diplomatic 
move  of  Hildebrand,  however,  seemed  to  offer  a  way 
for  surrender  under  the  garb  of  victory.  Therefore 
Henry  sent  a  trusted  representative  to  Rome  to  demand 
an  explanation  of  the  illegal  election  of  the  Pope. 
Hildebrand  simply  stated  that  the  office  had  been 
thrust  upon  him  and  that  he  had  refused  inauguration 
until  the  Emperor  should  consent  to  his  election. 
Hence  the  Emperor  was  forced  to  confirm  the  action 
and  forthwith  sent  his  chancellor  to  witness  the  instal- 
lation (June  30th)  of  Gregory  VII.  3 

1  Greenwood,  bk.  x.,  p.  249. 

2  Bonizo,  311. 

3  The  assumption  of  the  name  Gregory  VII.  was  a  blow  at 
imperial  power,  because  Henry  III.  had  deposed  Gregory  VI., 
Hildebrand's  old  master. 


448     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  papal  philosophy  of  Gregory  VII.  was  based  upon 
the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals.  His  conception  of 
the  Pope  is  summed  up  in  the  famous  Dictatus  Papas 
in  which  he  makes  the  successor  of  St.  Peter  God's 
representative  on  earth,  the  absolute  sovereign  of  the 
Church,  and  the  supreme  feudal  lord  of  the  world.1 
This  ideal  he  sought  to  realise  in  every  particular. 
The  clergy,  according  to  his  theory,  were  wholly 
dependent  upon  the  Pope's  will  and  must  be  absolute  iy 
free  from  every  vice  and  worldly  influence  in  order  that 
they  might  labour  only  to  save  men's  souls.  Hence,  he 
believed  in  the  great  need  of  reformation  and  in  the 
correction  of  all  abuses.  The  laity,  from  Emperor 
to  slave,  were  entirely  subjected  to  the  Pope  and  his 
clergy  in  both  temporal  and  spiritual  matters,  and 
therefore  must  render  absolute  obedience  to  the  com- 
mands of  the  Church.  In  his  reform  policy  as  Pope, 
Gregory  showed  himself  more  hostile  than  ever  against 
the  crying  evils  of  simony  and  the  marriage  or  concu- 
binage of  the  clergy.  But  twenty-five  years  of  effort 
to  cure  these  evils  in  the  Church  had  taught  him  that 
the  real  cause  of  all  the  other  evils  was  the  subjection 
of  the  clergy  to  secular  power.  The  solemn  denuncia- 
tions of  simony  by  the  Lateran  councils  were  nil  as 
long  as  kings  and  nobles  offered  each  ecclesiastical 
office  for  sale  to  the  highest  bidder.  It  was  useless 
to  order  the  clergy  to  give  up  their  luxurious  habits 
and  live  in  ascetic  purity  as  long  as  they  were 
tools  of  a  licentious  aristocracy.  Therefore  the 
papal   ax   must  be  laid  at  the  very  root  of  the  evil, 

1  Emerton,  242;  Henderson,  366;  Robinson,  i.,  274;  Thatcher 
and  McNeal,  No.  69;  Ogg,  No.  45.  It  is  now  pretty  clearly 
established  that  the  Dictatus  was  written  about  087  by  Cardinal 
Deusdedit. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  449 


namely,  lay  investiture  and  the  secular  control  of  the 
clergy. 

In  his  first  efforts  to  realise  his  lofty  ideal,  Gregory 
VII.  desired  to  unite  all  Christendom  under  the  suzer- 
ainty of  the  Pope  and  through  this  submission  to 
conquer  the  world  for  God.  On  the  very  day  of  his 
consecration  (April  30th)  he  sent  Cardinal  Hugo  to 
Spain  to  replace  the  Gothic  with  the  Roman  ritual 
and  thus  to  secure  Spain  as  a  papal  fief. 1  A  few  days 
later  he  journeyed  in  person  to  southern  Italy  to  secure 
renewal  of  the  submission  of  the  Normans.  When 
Guiscard  refused  to  comply  with  his  demands,  the 
Pope  called  on  William  of  Burgundy  for  troops. 
Finally  he  had  the  Council  of  Rome  excommunicate 
Guiscard  and  all  his  followers  and  thus  forced  their 
fealty.2  He  assumed  feudal  authority  in  Bohemia. 3 
The  Patriarch  of  Venice  was  sent  to  Constantinople 
to  restore  the  friendly  relations  between  the  Greek  and 
Roman  churches.4  He  compelled  the  Italian  nobles  to 
swear  to  him  the  oath  of  allegiance,  s  He  corrected 
the  church  of  Carthage,6  attempted  to  win  over 
Sweri,  the  King  of  Denmark,  and  forbade  the  King 
of  Norway  to  interfere  in  Danish  affairs. 7  He  treated 
the  King  of  Hungary  as  a  vassal  and  rebuked  him  for 
recognising  the  King  of  Germany  as  his  overlord!8 
Between  the  Duke  of  Poland  and  the  King  of  Russia  he 

1  Lib.,  i.,  7,  64;  iv.,  28;  Bowden,  i.,  334;  Thatcher  and  McNeal, 
No.  69,  71. 

2  Lib.,  i.,  46,  47;  Harduin,  vi.,  1260,  1521;  Johnson,  Normans  in 
Europe. 

3  Lib.,  i.,  45;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  70. 

4  Lib.,  L,  18. 

s  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  67,  68. 

6  Lib.,  i.,  22,  23. 

7  Lib.,  vi.,  13. 

8  Lib.,  ii.,  13,  63;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  72. 


45°     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


mediated  and  had  the  latter  go  to  Rome  to  be  crowned.1 
He  forced  the  French  King  to  promise  obedience.2 
He  voluntarily  sought  to  act  as  arbiter  between  the 
German  King  and  the  Saxons. 3  He  demanded  Peter's 
pence  from  William  the  Conqueror.  The  pence  was 
paid,  but  the  oath  of  loyalty  was  refused.  "I  have 
not  nor  will  I,"  said  William,  "swear  fealty  which 
was  never  sworn  by  any  of  my  predecessors  to  yours." * 
He  wrote  an  open  letter  to  Christendom  advocating 
a  general  crusade  against  the  Mohammedans.5  He 
asserted  his  right  to  end  war  and  to  dictate  the  terms 
of  peace. 6  He  declared  it  to  be  his  duty  to  compel  all 
rulers  to  govern  their  people  in  righteousness  on  pain -of 
deposition. 7  In  short,  no  region  was  too  remote  or  too 
barbarous  not  to  come  within  his  idea  of  ecclesiastical 
unity  and  of  papal  suzerainty. 8 

As  soon  as  elected  Gregory  VII.  began  to  purify 
the  Church  by  urging  the  bishops  to  enforce  the  laws 
against  simony  and  celibacy  which  had  been  practi- 
cally dead  letters.9  The  King  of  France  was  called 
to  account  for  his  simonaical  practices  and  under  threat 
of  excommunication  forced  to  promise  reformation.10 
Early  in  1074  a  great  reform  council  was  summoned 
to  meet  in  Rome. 1 1  Four  famous  reform  decrees  were 
enacted:  (1)  Churchmen  guilty  of  simony  were  forbid- 

1  Lib.,  ii.,  73,  74;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  73. 

2  Lib.,  i.,  35;  ii.,  5,  18,  32;  v.,  17. 

3  Lib.,  i.,  39. 

*  Lee,  121;  Colby,  37;  Freeman,  The  Norman  Conquest. 
s  Lib.,  i.,  49;  ii.,  31. 

6  Lib.,  i.,  39;  ii.,  70;  vi.,  13,  14. 
»  Lib.,  ii.,  51,  57;  iii.,  8. 

*  Lib.,  ii.,  51. 
»  Lib.,  i.,  30. 

«o  Lib.,  i.,  35,  36,  75. 

11  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  60,  61,  62. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  451 


den  to  officiate  in  religious  services.  (2)  Buyers  of 
church  properties  were  ordered  to  restore  them  and  the 
traffic  was  prohibited  for  the  future.  (3)  Priests 
guilty  of  marriage  or  concubinage  were  debarred  Liom 
exercising  clerical  functions.  Their  blessings  would 
be  curses  and  their  prayers  sins.  This  was  opposed  to 
"once  a  priest  always  a  priest."  Later  Wycliffe, 
Luther,  and  other  reformers  used  this  same  idea  with 
telling  effect.  (4)  Laymen  were  commanded  not 
to  receive  ministrations  from  clergymen  guilty  of 
violating  these  ordinances.  Altogether  these  reform 
measures  were  the  most  radical  yet  passed.  These 
revolutionary  edicts  were  sent  to  the  archbishops  of  the 
various  countries  with  instructions  to  put  them  into 
immediate  execution.  A  special  delegation  was  sent 
to  Henry  IV.  to  inform  him  of  the  results  of  the  council. 
It  was  headed  by  the  Empress  Agnes,  Henry's  mother, 
now  a  nun. *  A  solemn  pledge  was  secured  from  the 
German  King  to  execute  the  reform  measures  and  to 
dismiss  the  five  councillors,  who  had  been  put  under 
the  ban  by  Alexander  II. 

It  will  now  be  necessary  to  see  how  these  reforms 
were  received  in  the  various  countries.  Celibacy 
will  be  considered  first.2  Historically  this  institution 
runs  back  through  the  Christian  era  to  the  Jewish 
period.  Jewish  priests  married,  but  were  forbidden 
to  marry  harlots,  profane  women,  or  widows.  3  The 
New  Testament  contains  no  absolute  prohibition  of 
marriage.  The  Apostles  married  -* — even  Peter — and 
the  leaders   of  churches  were  advised  to  take  unto 

"  Lib.,  i.,  85. 

2  Lea,  History  of  Celibacy. 

3  Levit.  xxi.  7,  8,  13;  Exod.  xix.,  15. 

4  Mat.  viii.  14;  1  Cor.  ix.,  5. 


45 2      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


themselves  wives, 1  but  many  passages  were  soon 
interpreted  to  favour  celibacy.2  The  renunciation 
of  all  worldly  enjoyments  and  the  exaltation  of  the 
ascetic  life  above  the  social  led  to  voluntary  vows 
of  celibacy  as  early  as  the  second  century.  It  was 
not  long  until  the  Church  came  to  believe  that  the 
unmarried  condition  was  the  better  for  the  clergy.3 
This  belief  soon  developed  a  contempt  for  marriage; 
and  the  Popes  Calixtus  I.  (221)  and  Lucius  I.  (255)  are 
said  to  have  forbidden  the  marriage  of  priests.  In 
385  the  Bishop  of  Rome  enjoined  celibacy  on  all  the 
clergy,  and  Innocent  I.,  Leo  the  Great,  and  succeeding 
Popes  followed  the  same  policy.  In  the  fourth  century 
Church  councils  took  up  the  question,  and  the  East 
and  the  West  began  to  diverge  on  the  subject.  All 
over  western  Europe  councils  and  synods  approved 
celibacy  and  sought  to  force  it  upon  the  Church  over 
and  over  again.  Civil  law  stepped  in  to  confirm  these 
papal  and  synodical  decrees. 

In  1073,  although  celibacy  had  been  the  law  of  the 
Church  for  a  thousand  years,  it  had  never  been  uni- 
versally enforced.  The  Hildebrandine  Popes  and  the 
Clugniac  reformers  had  made  strenuous  efforts  to 
execute  the  reform  edicts  but  had  largely  failed.  In 
Italy,  nearly  all  the  clergy  were  married  in  Naples, 
while  Lombardy,  Florence,  and  Ravenna  championed 
the  institution;  even  in  Rome  itself  the  clergy  were 
largely  married.  The  sixty  wardens  in  St.  Peter's  had 
wives.  In  Germany  a  majority  of  the  clergy  were 
opposed  to  celibacy  and,  consequently,  they  were  ready 
to  join  the  Emperor  against  the  Pope.     In  France  the 

»  1  Cor.  ix.,  5. 

2  1  Cor.  vii.,  38. 

3  Hermas,  i.,  Vis.  2,  ch.  3 ;  Ign.  to  Polyc,  ch.  5. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  453 

Norman  bishops  lived  openly  with  their  wives  and 
families  and  the  common  priests  of  course  followed 
their  leaders.  This  was  the  situation  which  the  new 
Pontiff  was  called  upon  to  face. 

Gregory  VII.  saw  that  to  realise  his  theocracy  the 
Church  must,  have  an  open,  democratic,  priestly  caste. 
Marriage  would  make  that  caste  exclusive  and  heredi- 
tary, hence  corrupt  and  worldly,  and  would  thus  cripple 
the  Church  from  priest  to  Pope. 1  He  believed  that  the 
enforcement  of  celibacy  would  cut  the  clergy  free  from 
the  state  and  wed  them  to  the  Church.  They  would 
live  with  the  Church  as  her  protectors  and  not  with  the 
world.  The  Church  would  be  both  their  bride  and 
their  heir.  Hence  he  had  the  severe  measure  of  1074 
passed  and  was  resolved  to  enforce  it  all  over  Christen- 
dom. But  the  endeavour  to  execute  this  radical 
canon — to  destroy  an  institution  which  many  justified 
on  both  moral  and  natural  grounds — to  rend  asunder 
ties  of  the  tenderest  nature  on  earth — "to  make  wives 
prostitutes  and  children  bastards" — to  break  up 
families — was  strongly  resisted  all  over  Europe. 

In  Germany  the  Pope  was  called  a  heretic  and  a  mad- 
man for  setting  up  such  an  insane  dogma  against  the 
teaching  of  St.  Paul.  To  make  men  live  like  angels 
was  childish,  it  was  declared,  and  would  plunge  the 
clergy  into  worse  habits.  The  churchmen  declared  that 
they  would  be  men  and  give  up  their  priestly  offices 
sooner  than  desert  their  families.  Several  of  the 
bishops  headed  the  ant i -celibacy  party  and  openly  de- 
fied the  Pope  to  enforce  his  law.  The  Archbishop  of 
Mainz,  as  primate,  called  a  council  at  Erfurt.  When  he 
read  the  decree  he  was  greeted  with  howls  and  threats, 
and  nearly  lost  his  life.     Other  bishops  who  tried  to 

1  Pertz,  Leg.,  ii.,  561;  Labbe,  ix.,  ann.  937. 


454     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


promulgate  the  act  were  treated  in  a  similar  manner. 
The  threats  of  Gregory  availed  nothing.  *  The  laity, 
however,  probably  incited  by  the  Pope,  made  several 
outbreaks  against  the  married  priests,  but  without 
any  decisive  results,  and  the  evil  went  on.  In  France 
the  opposition  exceeded  that  in  Germany.  A  Paris 
synod  repudiated  the  decree  and  an  abbot  who  de- 
fended the  Pope  was  beaten,  spit  upon,  and  dragged 
to  prison.2  The  Archbishop  of  Rouen  attempted  to 
enforce  celibacy  but  was  stoned  and  compelled  to 
flee.3  The  Pope  fairly  foamed  with  anger  in  letters  to  the 
French  prelates,  4  but  the  hated  edict  was  not  enforced. 
In  England  the  Pope  made  no  special  effort  to  enforce 
this  reform  measure.5  Lanfranc  held  a  council  to 
reform  the  Church,  but  nothing  further  was  done. 6  In 
Spain  the  papal  legate  was  menaced  and  outraged  by  the 
clergy,  when  he  tried  to  enforce  celibacy. 7  In  Hungary 
there  was  shown  the  same  refusal  to  conform  to  the 
new  order  of  things.8  In  Italy,  Guiscard,  the  Norman 
ruler,  led  the  anti-celibacy  party  in  the  south  and 
prevented  the  execution  of  the  order.  In  Lombardy, 
Florence,  and  Ravenna  the  hostility  was  very  fierce. 
Milan  defiantly  quoted  St.  Ambrose  as  authority 
for  a  married  priesthood.9  Even  in  Rome  itself 
the  decree  was  executed  only  with  the  greatest  diffi- 
culty. But  in  the  face  of  all  this  opposition  Gregory 
did  not  waver.     Many  of  the  reform  party  likewise 

1  Lib.,  ii.,  29,  40;  iii.,  4. 

2  Mansi,  xx.,  437;  Mabillon,  vi.,  805. 

3  Mansi,  xx.,  441. 

*  Lib.,  ii.,  Ep.  5,  18,  32. 
5  Lib.,  i.,  70,  71. 

•  Harduin,  vi.,  1555. 
'  Ibid.,  vi.,  1605. 

8  Mansi,  xx.,  758,  760. 

9  Greenwood,  iv.,  434. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  455 


laboured  incessantly  with  him  to  cure  the  evil.  Ulti- 
mately, but  not  in  his  life  time,  the  principle  he  fought 
for  was  to  dominate. 

Simony,  one  of  the  most  wide-spread  evils  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  originated  with  Simon  Magnus  who  wished 
to  buy  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  money. * 
The  term  was  gradually  extended  in  its  meaning 
from  the  buying  or  selling  of  the  power  of  ordination 
to  the  purchase  or  sale  of  any  ecclesiastical  office  or 
privilege.  As  early  as  the  third  century  a  rich  ma- 
tron bought  the  bishopric  of  Carthage  for  her  serv- 
ant.2 This  evil  practice  slowly' grew  in  the  Church, 
until  Charles  the  Great  made  Church  offices  objects 
of  eager  desire  to  the  worldly,  then  the  crime  spread 
to  a  fearful  extent.  The  feudalisation  of  the  Church 
made  the  evil  very  common  from  the  Pope  to  priest 
and  even  gave  it  the  appearance  of  legality.  3  Con- 
rad II.  openly  offered  bishoprics  and  abbeys  for  sale 
to  the  highest  bidders.  +  In  the  time  of  Hildebrand 
the  papal  office  itself  was  openly  bought  and  sold. 
His  own  teacher,  Gregory  VI.,  had  purchased  the  empty 
honour  for  one  thousand  pounds  of  silver.  Archbishops 
purchased  their  sinecures  and  in  turn  compensated 
themselves  by  selling  minor  benefices  to  their  sub- 
ordinates. Bishoprics  and  abbacies  were  commonly 
sold  to  the  highest  bidders  by  the  kings  and  nobles. 
The  most  ordinary  ecclesiastical  positions  and  even 
consecrations  to  the  priesthood  were  sold.  So  wide- 
spread indeed  was  the  practice  that  it  was  generally 
viewed  as  normal  and  legitimates 

1  Acts  iii.,  18. 

2  Gibbon,  ii.,  457. 

3  Bowen,  i.,  289. 

4  Greenwood,  iv.,  277. 

5  Bowen,  i..  280. 


456     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Opposition  to  the  evil  early  appeared  and,  from  the 
fourth  century,  councils  and  synods  denounced  it.  In 
829  the  Council  of  Paris  asked  the  King  to  destroy  this 
heresy  so  detestable,  this  pest  so  hateful  to  God."  l 
All  of  the  good  Popes  from  Gregory  I.  to  Gregory  VII. 
attacked  the  abuse.  Even  the  Emperor  Henry  III. 
attempted  to  root  it  out. 2  The  corpus  juris  canonicis 
supplemented  by  the  civil  law  made  it  a  crime  and 
designated  the  penalties.  Priests  were  to  be  deprived 
of  their  benefices  and  deposed  from  orders;  monks 
were  to  be  confined  in  stricter  monasteries ;  and  laymen 
were  to  be  subjected  to  penance.  Every  reformer 
and  reform  movement  began  by  making  an  attack  on 
simony.  But  simony  was  too  deeply  rooted  as  a  part 
of  the  social,  political,  and  religious  world  to  be  mate- 
rially affected  before  the  time  of  Gregory  VII.,  who 
knew  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  realise  his  earthly 
theocracy  so  long  as  this  sin  demoralised  and  secularised 
the  clergy,  and  subjected  them  to  worldly  control. 
The  edict  of  1074,  therefore,  threw  down  the  gauntlet 
and  declared  war.3  This  had  often  been  done  before, 
but  Gregory  now  attacked  the  chief  sinners  in  selling 
Church  offices,  namely,  the  King  of  France,  who  gave 
excuses  and  promised  amendment,4  and  the  King 
of  Germany,  who  confessed  his  sin  and  declared  his 
intention  to  repair  the  evil.5  But  this  edict  like  that 
prohibiting  celibacy  was  not  enforced  simply  because 
the  secular  rulers  and  the  clergy  alike  were  infected 
with  the   disease.     The   Pope   resolved,  therefore,  to 

1  Harduin,  iv.,  1302. 

2  Cf.  Fisher. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  60,  61;  Robinson,  Readings,  i., 
275;  Henderson,  365. 

*  Lib.,  i.,  Ep.  9,  11,  35,  75. 
5  Lib.,  i.,  29,  30. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  457 

wage  the  war  in  person  and  to  strike  at  the  very  source 
of  all  simony.  For  success  he  relied  upon  the  thunder- 
bolts of  his  office. 

The  investiture  strife  next  engaged  the  attention 
of  Gregory  VII.  and  tested  his  power  and  ability  to  the 
utmost.  Lay  investiture,  like  so  many  other  practices 
in  the  Church,  had  its  origin  back  in  the  formative 
period  of  the  ecclesiastical  organisation.  Under  the 
Roman  Empire  the  Emperor  exercised  much  power 
in  the  appointment  of  Popes  and  bishops.1  The 
Merovingians  and  the  Carolingians,  following  the  ear- 
lier precedents,  both  exercised  the  right  of  nominat- 
ing bishops  in  the  Frankish  kingdom. 2  Under  Charles 
the  Great  and  his  descendants,  prelates  became  identi- 
fied with  barons — the  hierarchical  governors  of  the 
Church  with  the  feudal  dignitaries  of  the  Empire, — hence 
arose  the  universal  custom  of  ratifying  the  episcopal 
elections  by  regal  investiture.  The  bishop,  or  abbot, 
when  elected,  gave  pledges  of  fidelity  and  devotion 
and  later  paid  the  feudal  fee.  The  king  then  invested 
him  with  the  emblems  of  the  office,  namely,  the  sacer- 
dotal ring  signifying  his  marriage  to  the  Church,  and 
the  pastoral  staff  indicating  his  protection  of  his  flock. 
Then  he  was  consecrated  by  the  metropolitan.  When 
the  bishop  died,  the  ring  and  staff  were  returned  to  the 
king,  or  to  the  local  secular  authority.  In  Germany 
the  bishoprics  and  abbacies  almost  ceased  being 
ecclesiastical  and  became  little  more  than  political 
divisions  of  the  kingdom.  They  bore  the  same  relation 
to  the  sovereign  as  did  the  secular  feudal  fiefs.  The 
holders  had  the  rights  of  coinage,  toll,  market,  and 
jurisdiction ;  they  attended  court  and  exercised  military 

i  See  Chapter  XIV. 

2  Greenwood,  i.,  484,  485.  . 


458     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


powers  like  nobles.  By  the  time  of  Hildebrand  the  vast 
ecclesiastical  states  all  over  Europe  were  feudalised 
and  kings  and  nobles  controlled  the  appointment 
of  all  bishops  and  abbots.  The  higher  clergy  were 
recruited  mostly  from  the  worldly  nobility,  who  united 
th  ir  religious  with  their  civil  duties.  This  lay  in- 
ves  iture  was  the  cause  of  the  wide-spread,  brutalising 
sin  of  simony  and  must  be  annihilated  if  the  Church 
was  to  be  purified  and  to  fulfil  her  high  mission  on 
earth. 1  The  French  king  and  the  favourites  of  Henry 
IV.  had  filled  their  pockets  through  the  most  notorious 
simoniacal  dealings.2 

Before  the  time  of  Hildebrand,  simony,  but  not  lav 
investiture,  had  been  attacked.  In  1063  a  Roman 
synod  forbade  the  clergy  receiving  churches  from  the 
laymen.  Milan  and  the  German  court  in  1068  came 
into  collision  about  the  appointment  of  a  bishop 
Hil  lebrand,  immediately  upon  his  election,  found 
occasion  to  praise  Anself  for  refusing  installation 
from  Henry  IV.  In  1075  he  called  a  couno-'l  at  Rome 
and  had  this  famous  revolutionary  decree  passed: 

If  any  one  shall  from  henceforth  receive  any  bishopric 
or  abbey  from  any  layman,  let  him  not  be  received  among 
the  bishops  or  abbots,  nor  let  the  privilege  of  audience 
be  granted  him  as  to  a  bishop  or  abbot.  We,  moreover, 
deny  to  such  person  the  favour  of  St.  Peter  and  an  entrance 
into  the  Church,  until  he  shall  have  resigned  the  dignity 
which  he  has  obtained  both  by  the  crime  of  ambition  and 
disobedience  which  is  idolatry.  And  similarly  do  we  de- 
cree concerning  the  lesser  dignities  of  the  Church.  Also 
if  any  Emperor,  Duke,  Marquis,  Count,  secular  person  or 
power,  shall  presume  to  give  investiture  of  any  bishopric 

1  Lib.,  i.,  Ep.  92,  119;  ii.,  12,  18. 
?  Greenwood,  iv.,  281. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  459 


or  ecclesiastical  dignity  let  him  know  himself  to  be  bound 
by  the  same  sentence. i 

This  edict  was  immediately  sent  to  all  the  bishops  of 
the  Empire  and  no  doubt  all  over  Christendom.  It. 
began  the  struggle  which  rent  both  the  Empire  and  the 
Church  into  two  hostile  parties  and  continued  long 
after  Gregory  VII.  died  in  exile.  It  was  unquestionably 
revolutionary,  because  Pope  after  Pope  had  recognised 
the  right  of  investiture  by  laymen  and  the  matter 
was  generally  treated  as  authorised  by  public  law. 2 

The  Pope  opened  the  skirmish  through  the  council 
by  citing  many  bishops  from  Germany,  England,  France, 
and  Italy  to  answer  to  him  for  ecclesiastical  offences, 
chiefly  simoniacal;  by  continuing  the  curse  laid  on 
Robert  of  Apulia;  by  threatening  the  King  of  France 
with  interdict,  unless  he  repented  and  made  reparation ; 
by  deposing  the  bishops  of  Pavia,  Turin,  and  Piacenza; 
by  treating  the  German  prelates  with  unusual  severity ; 
in  repeating  the  excommunication  of  the  German  King's 
ministers ;  and  in  putting  under  the  ban  the  bishops  of 
Speyer  and  Strassburg  and  the  Archbishop  of  Bremen. 

The  conflict  centred  about  Henry  IV.,  who  entirely 
disregarded  the  law  of  lay  investiture.  3  He  looked 
upon  investiture  as  a  royal  prerogative,  hence  he  invested 
the  Bishop  of  Liege  (July,  1075),  appointed  his  chaplain 
Archbishop  of  Milan  against  the  Pope's  nominee  (Sept., 
1075),  named  a  Bishop  of  Bomberg  without  consulting 
Gregory   VII.,4    chose   the   Abbot    of    Fulda    (Dec, 

1  Harduin,  vi.,  1551;  Pertz,  viii.,  412;  Lib.,  iii.,  367;  Henderson, 

365- 

2  Greenwood,  iv.,  244,  245. 

3  Henry's  humble  letter  of  1073  should  be  borne  in  mind.     Bowen, 

i-,  340. 

*  Pertz,  v.,  219. 


460     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


1075)  and  also  for  Lorsch, *  disposed  of  the  churches  of 
Fermo  and  Spolita  in  the  same  way,  and  reached  the 
climax  when  he  attempted  to  force  his  own  candidate 
into  the  archiepiscopal  seat  of  Cologne.2  Gregory 
viewed  these  acts  as  an  infraction  of  the  King's  pro- 
mises and  as  showing  contempt  for  the  law  of  the  Holy 
See  and  its  prerogatives.  Hence  he  summoned  the 
Archbishop  of  Milan  to  Rome  to  answer  for  his  in- 
trusion. 3  After  the  next  appointments  were  made 
by  the  King  (Dec,  1075),  he  wrote  a  stern  letter  of 
admonition  to  the  king.  4  Finally,  after  the  Cologne 
affair,  the  Pope  cited  the  king  to  answer  for  his  sins 
at  Rome  before  a  certain  date  or  "Be  cut  off  from  the 
body  of  the  Lord  and  be  smitten  with  the  curse  of  the 
anathema."  The  legates  who  carried  this  information 
to  the  king  were  insultingly  dismissed,  s 

Henry  IV.,  backed  up  by  the  German  clergy  and 
nobility  and  joined  by  the  anti-sacerdotal  and  anti- 
reform  parties  in  Italy,  felt  powerful  enough  to  defy 
the  command  of  the  Pope.0  To  offset  the  summons 
to  Rome  Henry  called  the  Diet  of  Worms  (Jan.  25, 
1076) ,  at  which  twenty-four  bishops  and  two  archbishops 
wTere  present.  Cardinal  Hugo,  who  had  helped  to 
make  Hildebrand  Pope  but  who  was  now  under  the  ec- 
clesiastical ban,  brought  forged  complaints  from  Italy 
and  read  a  false  life  of  Gregory  VII.     The  Emperor  and 

>  Pertz,  v.,  236,  237. 

2  Ibid.,  v.,  241. 

3  Lib.,  iii.,  Ep.  8;  Greenwood,  iv.,  362. 

*  Lib.,  iii.,  Ep.  10;  Greenwood,  iv.,  365;  Bowen,  ii.,  75;  Ogg, 
No.  46;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  74;  Henderson,  373. 

s  Greenwood,  iv.,  365  to  369;  Pertz,  v.,  241;  Robinson,  Readings, 
i.,  276;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  74;  Henderson,  367. 

«  Greenwood,  iv.,  371;  Bowen,  ii.,  81;  Henderson,  372;  Robinson, 
Readings,  i.,  279;  Ogg,  No.  47. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  46i 

the  bishops  renounced  their  allegiance  to  the  Pope  and 
formally  impeached  him  on  seven  grave  charges  rang- 
ing from  the  grossest  licentiousness  to  the  assumption 
of  the  functions  of  God  Himself.  *  The  king  immediately 
sent  letters  announcing  this  action  to  the  prelates  and 
cities  of  Lombardy,  where  the  news  was  received  with 
joy;  to  the  Romans  calling  upon  them  to  expel  "The 
enemy  of  the  Empire,"  "The  false  Monk  Hildebrand," 
the  "Usurper  of  the  Holy  See";  and  to  the  Pope  him- 
self to  whom  the  letter  was  delivered  in  the  very  Lat- 
eran  Council  to  which  the  king  had  been  summoned. 

The  royal  herald  addressed  the  Pope  in  these  words : 
"My  lord,  the  King,  and  the  bishops  of  the  Empire, 
do  by  mouth  command  you,  Hildebrand,  without  delay 
to  resign  the  Chair  of  Peter,  for  it  is  unlawful  for  you  to 
aspire  to  so  lofty  a  place  without  the  royal  consent  and 
investiture."  Incensed  by  this  insolent  address,  the 
lay  attendants  of  the  Pope  would  have  drawn  their 
swords  upon  the  herald  had  the  Pope  not  covered 
him  with  his  mantle.2  When  the  tumult  had  sub- 
sided Gregory  spoke  to  the  council  in  these  words: 

Let  us  not,  brethren,  disturb  the  Church  of  God  by 
noise  and  tumult.  Doth  not  the  holy  scripture  teach  us  to 
expect  perilous  times — seasons  in  which  men  shall  be 
lovers  of  themselves,  covetous,  boasters,  proud,  blasphem- 
ers, disobedient  to  fathers,  unthankful,  unholy,  not  ren- 
dering obedience  to  their  teachers?  .  .  .  The  word 
of  God  calleth  to  us,  "It  must  needs  be  that  offences 
come;  but  woe  to  that  man  by  whom  the  offence  cometh." 
And  unto  us  it  is  said,  in  order  to  instruct  us  how  we  ought 
to  demean  ourselves  in  the  sight  of  our  enemies:  "Behold, 

>  Pertz.ii.,  44;  Mansi,  xx.,  466;  Greenwood,  :v.,  379;  Henderson, 
373  ;  Thatcher  and  McNea.1,  No.  76. 
2  Muratori,  iii.,  334. 


462     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


I  send  you  forth  as  sheep  in  the  midst  of  wolves;  be  ye 
therefore  wise  as  serpents  and  harmless  as  doves."  And 
what  though  at  this  very  time  the  forerunner  of  anti- 
Christ  hath  risen  up  in  the  Church,  yet  we,  under  the  instruc- 
tions of  the  Lord  and  of  the  holy  fathers,  have  long 
since  learned  how  duly  to  combine  both  these  virtues.  * 

The  council  now  amidst  the  greatest  indignation  urged 
the  Pope  to  depose  the  insolent  king  and  to  put  him  and 
his  accomplices  under  the  ban.  The  king  was  formally 
excommunicated  and  his  subjects  absolved  from 
all  allegiance  to  him.2  The  churchmen  who  acted  as 
the  king's  tools  were  likewise  outlawed  and  a  letter  to 
"all  defenders  of  the  Christian  faith"  announced  the 
curse  laid  on  Germany.3  This  was  the  first  instance 
of  the  deposition  of  a  king  by  a  Pope  and  was  based 
on  the  false  decretals  and  the  assumption  that  this 
power  was  an  undoubted  prerogative  of  the  Chair  of 
St.  Peter.  *  As  a  result  of  this  action  both  Germany 
and  Italy  were  divided  into  two  great  parties,  the  papal 
and  the  imperial.  Hoping  to  save  himself  by  a  counter 
blow,  s  Henry  had  one  of  his  bishops  pronounce  an 
excommunication  and  anathema  upon  Gregory  and 
induced  a  servile  synod  at  Pa  via  to  reiterate  the  curse. 
Civil  and  ecclesiastical  discord  broke  out  throughout 
the  Empire.  Disaffected  nobles  took  this  occasion  to 
conspire  against  the  king,  and  to  plot  with  the  papal 
party.     Prelates  fell  over  each  other  in  their  eagerness 

«  Bowen,  ii.,  101;  Greenwood,  iv.,  385. 

2  Bowen,  ii.,  108;  Greenwood,  iv.,  386;  Harduin,  vi.,  1566; 
Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  77;  Henderson,  376;  Robinson,  Readings, 
i.,  281;  Ogg,  No.  48. 

J  Henderson,  380;  Bowen,  ii.,  no;  Greenwood,  iv.,  388;  Lib., 
iii.,  Ep.  6. 

*  Greenwood,  iv.,  389. 

5  Henderson,  377. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  463 


to  desert  the  outlawed  ruler  and  to  seek  reconciliation 
with  the  Pope.  The  German  papal  party  held  a  great 
convention  (Oct.  14,  1076)  at  Tribur  on  the  Rhine. 
The  king"  was  in  camp  just  across  the  river  at  Oppen- 
heim  with  his  army.  The  Pope  sent  his  representatives 
to  purify  the  convention  and  to  guide  the  proceedings. 
All  the  sins  of  the  age  were  charged  against  the  king  and 
all  allegiance  to  him  was  renounced,  while  it  was  declared 
that  the  crown  would  be  forfeited  within  a  year  unless 
the  king  obtained  absolution.  He  was  ordered  to 
retire  to  Speyer  as  a  private  gentleman  until  the  ques- 
tion was  settled  and  the  Pope  was  urged  to  hasten 
to  Germany  to  pass  sentence  on  the  royal  head. 

Henry  saw  that  the  tide  was  against  him  and  resolved 
to  follow  the  one  course  open  to  him,  namely,  to 
throw  himself  at  the  feet  of  the  Pope  and  beg  for- 
giveness. He  dismissed  his  court  and  his  ministers, 
publicly  repudiated  every  act  against  the  Holy  See, 
promised  satisfaction  to  the  Pope  and  reformation,  * 
begged  a  permit  to  visit  Rome  to  sue  for  pardon,  and 
started  for  Italy  in  1077  to  meet  the  Pope.  His 
accomplices,  probably  at  his  suggestion,  took  the 
same  course  but  by  another  route.  Meanwhile  the 
Pope  was  hastening  northward  to  Germany.  With 
excellent  tact  and  courage  Henry  made  his  way  over 
the  Alps  in  the  midst  of  a  very  severe  winter .  into 
northern  Italy,  where  he  was  given  a  hearty  welcome, 
and  then  hastened  on  to  Canossa,  a  strong  castle 
belonging  to  the  Countess  Matilda  where  the  Pope  had 
broken  his  journey.  Meanwhile  the  companions  and 
ministers  of  Henry  who  had  fallen  under  the  papal 
displeasure  outstripped  the  king  and,  with  naked  feet 
and. clothed  in  sackcloth,  presented  themselves  to  the 

1  Henderson,  384;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  78. 


464     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Pope,  humbly  imploring  pardon  and  absolution  from  the 
terrible  anathema.  With  some  hesitation,  the  Pope 
granted  their  petition.  After  a  brief  penance,  the  pen- 
itents were  dismissed  with  an  injunction  not  to  hold  any 
communication  with  the  king,  until  he  should  in  like 
manner  have  been  released  from  the  bonds  of  the  Church. 

With  his  natural  impetuosity  Henry  resolved  to 
have  the  humiliating  scene  over  with  as  soon  as  possible. 
To  plead  his  case  he  had  secured  the  good  offices  of 
his  mother-in-law,  several  powerful  noblemen,  the 
Abbot  of  Clugny,  and  a  few  other  influential  orthodox 
members  of  the  papal  party.  He  had  even  pursuaded 
the  Countess  Matilda  to  induce  the  Pope  to  give  his 
case  a  merciful  consideration.  The  Pope's  severity 
was  softened  by  the  entreaties  coming  from  so  many 
persons,  and  it  was  finally  agreed  that  the  king  should 
appear  before  the  Pope  on  a  certain  day ;  that  he  should 
fully  admit  his  guilt;  that  he  should  express  sincere 
repentance  for  the  insults  he  had  heaped  upon  this  suc- 
cessor of  St.  Peter;  that  he  should  profess  full  contri- 
tion for  all  his  sins  and  crimes;  and  that  he  should 
promise  to  atone  for  all  former  vices  by  obeying  papal 
commands  in  the  future  and  by  submitting  to  such 
conditions  as  the  Pope  should  impose.  Henry  accepted 
these  terms  and  prepared  for  the  act  of  shame  and 
humiliation. 

On  the  stated  day  he  appeared  before  the  outer  gate 
of  the  castle  of  Canossa,  was  admitted  into  the  outer 
court  and  told  to  divest  himself  of  every  vestige  of 
royalty.  He  was  then  dressed  in  a  garment  of  sack- 
cloth and  stood  in  the  outer  court  barefooted  and 
fasting  from  morn  till  night. 

And  thus  [says  the  biographer  of  Hildebrand]  for  three 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  465 


entire  days,  he  ceased  not,  with  much  weeping  and  many 
supplications,  to  implore  the  apostolic  commiseration,  until 
the  bowels  of  all  the  spectators  yearned  with  compassion, 
so  that  with  tears  in  their  eyes  they  earnestly  besought  the 
pontiff  to  have  mercy — nay,  even  so  that  they  exclaimed 
against  the  stern  severity  of  the  man  of  God  as  smacking 
of  cruelty:  then  at  length,  overborne  by  the  solicitations 
of  all  around  him,  he  resolved  to  admit  the  penitent  into 
the  bosom  of  the  Church ;  but  only  upon  terms  which  should 
either  crush  him  effectually,  or  for  the  remainder  of  his 
days  convert  him  into  the  passive  instrument  of  the  papal 
policy. 1 

The  stipulations  of  absolution  accepted  by  Henry 
were:  (1)  That  he  should  appear  for  trial  before  an 
imperial  synod  to  answer  all  charges,  and  that  if 
proven  innocent  should  retain  his  crown;  but  if  by 
the  laws  of  the  Church  he  should  be  proved  guilty  he 
would  surrender  all  claims  to  the  throne.  (2)  That 
until  the  trial,  he  should  lay  aside  royalty  and  per- 
form no  active  government.  (3)  That  until  acquitted 
he  should  collect  no  more  taxes  than  was  absolutely 
necessary  for  the  sustenance  of  his  family.  (4)  That 
all  contracts  with  his  subjects  should  be  invalid  un- 
til after  the  trial.  (5)  That  he  should  dismiss  from 
his  service  all  councillors  designated  by  the  Pope. 
(6)  That  if  freed  of  guilt,  he  should  promise  obedience 
and  aid  in  reforming  the  Church.  (7)  That  the  vio- 
lation of  any  of  these  terms  would  ipso  facto  invali- 
date the  absolution.2  Then  followed  the  solemn  act 
of  absolution  and  the  sacerdotal  purgation  which  was 
taken  by  the  Pope  but   declined   by  the  king.     The 

1  Henderson,  385;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  282;  Thatcher  and 
McNeal,  No.  80. 

2  Henderson,  385;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  81;  Ogg,  No.  49. 


466     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


king  was  then  admitted  to  communion  and  sumptu- 
ously feasted  by  the  Pope,  after  which  he  was  dismissed 
to  rejoin  his  followers  awaiting  him  at  the  castle  gate. 
The  trying  ordeal  of  Canossa  was  over.  The  mighty 
Pope  of  small,  wiry  stature  and  physically  weak  had 
compelled,  by  the  sheer  force  of  the  spiritual  weapons 
in  his  hands,  the  powerful  German  ruler  to  humbly 
bow  before  him  and  beg  forgiveness  and  absolution. 
Apparently  it  was  a  great  victory  for  the  Pope,  but  the 
sequel  makes  the  result  look  like  a  defeat. * 

Henry's  humiliation  alienated  his  Lombard  adher- 
ents. By  opposing  Rome  he  had  lost  one  kingdom; 
by  submitting  to  Rome  he  was  about  to  lose  another. 
No  sooner  was  he  beyond  the  castle  walls  of  Canossa 
with  the  heavy  curse  removed  from  his  head  than  he 
began  to  plot  to  remove  the  effects  of  his  apparently 
disgraceful  defeat.  From  now  on  the  king  becomes 
the  aggressive  champion  of  secular  supremacy,  while 
the  Pope  assumes  the  defensive.  A  trap  was  laid  to 
catch  the  Pope  at  the  Council  of  Mantua  and  he  was 
practically  held  as  a  prisoner  at  Canossa.  Meanwhile 
Henry  openly  violated  his  agreement,  by  assuming  the 
rule  of  Lombardy,  and  denounced  the  Pope  in  strong 
terms.  The  rebellious  princes  in  Germany,  urged  on 
by  the  papal  party  and  taking  advantage  of  this  situa- 
tion, called  the  convention  of  Forscheim,  and  there 
elected  Rudolph  of  Swabia  as  King  of  Germany.  He 
promised  to  abolish  simony,  to  renounce  the  right  of 
investing  bishops,  and  to  recognise  the  law  of  heredity, 
so  was  crowned  March  26,  1077.  Under  these  circum- 
stances Henry  IV.,  supported  by  the  Lombard  party 
and  the  strong  imperial  party  in  Germany,  returned 
to  his  kingdom  to  regain  his  crown  through  civil  war. 

1  Pertz,  v.;  Bowen,  ii.,  161;  Greenwood,  iv.,  411. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  467 


Gregory  VII. ,  hoping  to  profit  by  the  situation ,  demand  ed 
that  both  kings  refer  their  cause  to  him  as  arbiter  and, 
finally,  when  Henry  proved  obstinate,  in  a  council  held 
at  Rome  in  1080  the  Pope  renewed  the  excommunica- 
tion of  Henry,  and  again  deposed  him. 1  The  German 
crown  was  bestowed  by  apostolic  authority  upon  Ru- 
dolph. In  the  same  council  the  edict  against  lay  in- 
vestiture was  renewed  in  a  harsher  spirit  than  ever. 
War  to  the  knife  was  now  inevitable.  Rigid  party  lines 
were  again  formed.  Henry  gradually  recovered  his  mas- 
tery of  Germany.  The  German  clergy  in  June,  1080, 
blaming  Gregory  VII.  for  the  ruinous  civil  war,  once 
more  retaliated  by  deposing  the  Pope. 2  A  council  held 
at  Brescia  the  same  year  elected  Clement  III.  as  anti- 
Pope.  Gregory's  efforts  to  raise  up  allies  were  all  in 
vain.  Henry  IV.  laid  seige  to  Rome  with  a  big  army 
and  at  last  after  a  long  struggle  was  master  of  it. 
Clement  III.  was  installed  as  Pope  and  on  Easter 
Day,  1084,  Henry  IV.  received  as  his  reward  the  im- 
perial crown.  Gregory  VII.,  defeated  by  the  German 
warrior  and  rescued  from  the  Eternal  City  with  difficulty 
by  the  trusty  Normans,  withdrew  to  Salerno  to  die  with 
the  curse  of  the  Emperor  on  his  lips,  saying:  "I  have 
loved  justice  and  hated  iniquity,  therefore  I  die  in 
exile"  (May  25,  1085). 

Gregory  VII.  was  a  man  of  unquestionable  ascetic 
purity.  The  charges  made  against  him  by  his  enemies 
are  probably  untrue.  His  relations  with  Matilda, 
Beatrice,  and  Empress  Agnes  were  of  the  purest 
character.  In  his  efforts  and  ideas  he  was  undoubtedly 
sincere  and  firmly  believed  that  he  really  was  the 
representative  of  God  on  earth.     It  must  be  remem- 

1  Greenwood,  iv.,  507;  Henderson,  388. 

2  Henderson,  391,  394. 


468     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


bered,  however,  that  his  conceptions  of  veracity,  justice, 
honour,  and  charity  were  those  of  a  mediaeval  despot. 
He  was  one  of  the  greatest  politicians  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  but  a  policy  man  controlled  by  the  loftiest  pur- 
pose. To  attain  his  ecclesiastical  ideal,  policy  and 
principle  were  one  and  he  almost  acted  as  though  the 
end  justified  the  means.  After  Charles  the  Great  and 
Otto  the  Great  before  him  and  Innocent  III.  after  him  he 
had  the  greatest  organising  mind  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
Few  other  men  can  compare  with  him.  He  com- 
prehended the  grand  Civitas  Dei  of  Augustine  and 
through  the  false  decretals  he  attempted  to  create 
the  great  universal  papal  theocracy  in  which  the  state 
should  be  subject  to  the  Church,  the  Church  purified 
and  subjected  to  the  Pope,  and  the  whole  Church  ruled 
by  Lex  Christi.  Nature  endowed  him  with  an  indom- 
itable will,  a  restless  energy,  a  clear  perception,  a 
dauntless  courage,  an  imperious  temper,  an  instinct  for 
leadership,  a  stern  inflexible  disposition,  a  haughty  in- 
solent bearing,  and  a  power  to  draw  and  to  repulse. 
These  native  talents  were  intensified  by  monastic  edu- 
cation which  taught  him  both  the  virtue  and  necessity 
of  obedience,  trained  him  to  subordinate  all  affections, 
opinions,  and  interest  to  the  one  great  object,  and  made 
him  a  true  child  of  the  mediaeval  Church  with  the 
highest  ideas  of  her  prerogatives  and  mission  on  earth. 
The  churchman  completely  swallowed  up  the  man. 

Hildebrand  was  a  wily  religious  autocrat  and  not 
a  theologian  or  a  moralist.  His  ideas  came  from 
Augustine  and  Pseudo-Isidore.  His  Christianity  was 
based  on  tradition  and  historical  evolution  rather  than 
on  the  Bible.  He  denounced  simony  and  advocated 
celibacy,  but  not  on  moral  grounds  so  much  as  because 
of   his   sincere   conviction   about   their   effect   on   his 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  469 

great  ecclesiastical  machine.  The  Church  to  him 
was  a  grand  secular  power,  resting  on  spiritual  founda- 
tions, which  had  to  employ  worldly  means  against  the 
other  secular  powers.  Europe  was  a  chessboard  and 
with  the  hand  of  a  skilled  master  he  moved  kings, 
queens,  knights,  and  bishops.  His  schemes  were 
worthy  of  the  plotter — his  courage  became  defiance  in 
danger — his  forces  were  handled  with  consummate 
skill — his  fatal  thrusts  were  driven  home  with  his 
teeth  clenched — if  he  seemed  to  yield  it  was  only  to  gain 
a  greater  advantage.  As  Pope  he  was  over  all,  the 
source  of  all  law,  judged  by  none,  and  responsible  to 
God  alone.  Under  this  conviction,  intensified  as  the 
years  passed,  he  lived  in  perpetual  conflict,  and  died 
a  refugee  from  the  capital  of  his  great  ecclesiastical 
Empire. 

Napoleon  once  said:  "Si  je  n'etais  Napoleon,  je 
voudrais  etre  Gregoire  VII."  There  were  many  points 
of  resemblance  between  these  two  great  characters. 
Both  were  of  obscure  birth  and  low  origin.  Both 
possessed  the  same  indomitable  character  and  threat- 
ening ambition.  Both  were  reformers.  Gregory  estab- 
lished a  hierarchy  which  still  lives;  Napoleon  created 
an  administration  which  still  survives.  Gregory 
wanted  to  make  the  Church  the  master  of  the  world ; 
Napoleon,  France.  Gregory  made  the  Lex  Christi 
the  basis  of  all;  Napoleon,  the  revolution.  Both 
wanted  to  make  feudal  vassals  of  the  world's  rulers. 
Both  had  an  indomitable  enemy — Henry  IV.  and 
England.  Both  used  the  power  of  excommunication. 
Gregory  had  his  Canossa;  Napoleon  his  Moscow. 
Italy  was  invaded  and  Rome  sacked;  France  was 
invaded  and  Paris  taken.  Salerno  and  St.  Helena 
in  each  case  closed  the  drama. 


47o    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Gregory  VII.  was  the  creator  of  the  political  Papacy 
of  the  Middle  Ages  because  he  was  the  first  who  dared 
to  completely  enforce  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals. 
He  found  the  Pope  elected  by  the  Emperor,  the  Roman 
clergy,  and  the  people ;  he  left  the  election  in  the  hands 
of  an  ecclesiastical  College  of  Cardinals.  He  found 
the  Papacy  dependent  upon  the  Empire;  he  made 
it  independent  of  the  Empire  and  above  it.  He  declared 
the  states  of  Europe  to  be  fiefs  of  St.  Peter  and  demanded 
the  oath  of  fealty  from  their  rulers.  He  found  the 
clergy,  high  and  low,  dependent  allies  of  secular 
princes  and  kings ;  he  emancipated  them  and  subjected 
them  to  his  own  will.  He  reorganised  the  Church  from 
top  to  bottom  by  remodelling  the  papal  curia,  by  estab- 
lishing the  College  of  Cardinals,  by  employing  papal 
legates,  by  thwarting  national  churches,  by  controlling 
synods  and  councils,  and  by  managing  all  Church 
property  directly.  He  was  the  first  to  enforce  the 
theory  that  the  Pope  could  depose  and  confirm  or 
reject  kings  and  Emperors.  He  attempted  to  reform 
the  abuses  in  the  Church  and  to  purify  the  clergy. 
Only  partial  success  attended  these  efforts,  but  tri- 
umph was  to  come  later  on  as  a  result  of  his  labours. 
His  endeavour  to  realise  his  theocracy  was  grand  but 
impracticable  as  proved  by  its  failure.  It  was  like 
forcing  a  dream  to  be  true;  yet  Innocent  III.  almost 
succeeded  in  western  Europe  a  little  more  than  a 
century  later.  The  impress  of  Gregory  VII. 's  gigantic 
ability  was  left  upon  his  own  age  and  upon  all  succeed- 
ing ages. 

The  strife  over  lay  investiture  was  carried  on  by 
the  successors  of  Gregory  VII.  Victor  III.  (1086-1087) 
renewed  the  investiture  decrees  but  died -too  soon  to 
accomplish  anything.     Urban  II.  (1088-1099),  imbued 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  471 


with  the  zeal  and  ability  of  Hildebrand,  drove  Henry 

IV.  out  of  Italy  and  had  his  son,  Conrad,  crowned 
King  of  Italy  (1093) .  Pope  Urban  gave  all  his  strength 
to  the  crusading  mania  and  made  little  progress  with 
the  Hildebrandine  reform.  Paschal  II.  (1099-1118), 
a  Clugniac  monk  and  cardinal  under  Gregory  VII., 
renewed  the  excommunication  of  Henry  IV.,  and 
plotted  with  Henry  V.  to  induce  him  to  revolt  against 
his  father  (1104)  and  thus  to  force  him  to  surrender 
his  crown.  The  aged  Henry  IV.  died  under  the  awful 
curse  of  the  Church  and  at  war  with  this  traitorous 
son.  Paschal  II.  took  up  the  question  of  lay  investiture, 
likewise,  and  had  the  practice  condemned  in  the  Coun- 
cil of  Troyes  (1107)  and  promulgated  the  prohibition 
all  over  Christendom.  Henry  V.  was  forced  to  abjure 
investiture  before  he  could  again  receive  his  imperial 
crown  from  papal  hands.  At  length  in  1 1 1 1  Paschal  II. 
entered  into  an  arrangement  with  Henry  V.,  who  had 
appeared  before  Rome  with  a  large  army,  by  which 
the  Pope  promised  that  clerical  princes  in  the  Empire 
should  give  up  all  temporal  rights  and  possessions  , 
received  since  the  time  of  Charles  the  Great.  The 
Church  and  its  clergy  were  to  live  on  the  tithes  and 
the  gifts  of  pious  persons.  The  Emperor,  for  his  part, 
agreed  to  surrender  all  claim  to  nomination,  election, 
and  investiture,  and  to  guarantee  to  the  Papacy  the 
full  enjoyment  of  all  its  possessions  and  rights.  This 
agreement  was  fair  and  just,  though  the  German  clergy 
objected  to  such  a  wholesale  change  without  their 
consent.  The  compact  was  publicly  proclaimed  in 
St.  Peter's  before  the  imperial  coronation  of   Henry 

V.  -  (Feb.    12,    mi)1   and   aroused   a   great   tumult. 

1  Henderson,  Hist.  Docs,  of  the  M.  A.,  405;  Matthews,  p.  61; 
Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  83,  84. 


472     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Therefore  Henry  V.  repudiated  the  treaty,  captured 
the  Pope,  carried  him  together  with  the  cardinals  of! 
as  prisoners,  and  wrung  from  him  ignoble  terms  of 
peace  (Apr.  12th)  which  stated  that  the  clerical  princes 
in  Germany  were  to  retain  all  their  possessions,  that 
the  Emperor  was  to  have  the  full  right  of  investiture, 
but  without  simony,  and  that  the  higher  clergy  were  to 
consecrate  the  nominees  after  their  investiture. *  At 
the  same  time  Paschal  crowned  Henry  and  promised 
never  to  excommunicate  him.  After  the  Pope's 
release,  he  had  a  Roman  synod  repudiate  the  treaty 
and  of  course  the  excommunication  of  the  Emperor 
followed  (11 1 2)  and  civil  war  was  continued. 

Calixtus  II.  (n  1 9-1 1 24),  a  Clugniac  monk  of  the 
royal  Burgundian  house,  settled  the  perplexing 
question  of  lay  investiture  in  11 22  by  the  Concordat 
of  Worms.2  The  Pope  agreed  (1)  that  the  election  of 
bishops  and  abbots  in  Germany  should  occur  in  the 
Emperor's  presence  and  without  simony  or  violence; 
(2)  that  the  Emperor  should  decide  all  disputed  elections 
and  enforce  his  decisions ;  (3)  that  the  Emperor  should 
invest  with  the  lance  and  receive  homage;  (4)  that 
bishops  or  abbots  consecrated  in  Italy  or  Burgundy 
should  also  be  invested  by  the  Emperor  and  render 
homage  within  six  months ;  (5)  and  that  papal  aid  should 
be  given  to  the  Emperor  whenever  requested.  The 
Emperor  for  his  part  promised  (1)  to  surrender  all 
investiture  through  the  ring  and  the  staff  to  the  Church ; 
(2)  to  grant  "canonical  elections  and  free  consecration  " 
in  all  churches  in  the  Empire;  (3)  to  restore  "all 
the  possessions  and  regalia  of  St.  Peter"  to  the  Holy 

1  In  11 15  the  famous  donation  of  Matilda  was  made. 

2  Henderson,  Hist.  Docs,  of  the  M.A.,  408;  Thatcher  and  McNeal, 
No.  85,  86;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  292;  Ogg,  No.  50. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  473 


Roman  Church ;  (4)  to  secure  the  return  of  property- 
held  by  others;  (5)  and  to  give  the  Pope  all  needed  aid 
and  justice. l  The  concordat  was  in  character,  there- 
fore, a  compromise.  It  spared  both  the  Emperor 
and  the  Pope  the  humiliation  of  defeat  because  now 
both  made  the  appointment — one  politically,  the 
other  spiritually.  The  Emperor  retained  but  half  of 
his  former  rights,  yet  could  control  the  elections. 
The  Pope  gained  "the  ring  and  staff,"  yet  fell  far 
short  of  what  Gregory  VII.  had  demanded.  The 
document  was  full  of  ambiguity  and  who  was  victor' — 
Pope  or  Emperor — has  been  a  much  disputed  question. 
The  concordat  lasted  down  through  the  centuries  as 
the  basis  for  settling;  all  these  appointments  until 
the  dissolution  of  the  Empire  in  1806.  It  was  fre- 
quently violated  by  both  Emperor  and  Pope,  but 
on  the  whole  gave  general  satisfaction  and  determined 
many  menacing  disputes.  It  was  modified  by  Lothair 
in  1 183  so  as  to  permit  the  Emperor  to  send  a  delegate 
to  the  election. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — Colby,  C.  W.,  Selections  from  the  Sources  of 
English  History.     N.  Y.,  1899,  No.  14,  16. 

2. — Finch,  G.,  A  Selection  of  the  Letters  of 
Hildebrand.  Lond.,  1853.  40  important 
letters. 

3. — Gee,  H.,  and  Hardy,  W.  J.,  Documents  Illus- 
trative of  English  Church  History.  Lond., 
1896. 

4. — Henderson,  E.  F.,  Select  Historical  Docu- 
ments of  the  Middle  Ages.     N.  Y.,  1892. 

5. — Lee,  G.  C,  Leading  Documents  of  English 
History.     Lond.,  1900.     Sec.   50,   51,   52,   57. 

1  At  the  great  Lateran  council  of  11 23  this  Concordat  of  Worms 
was  confirmed. 


474     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


6. — Ogg,  F.  A.,  Source-Book  of  Mediaeval  History. 

N.  Y.,  1908. 
7. — Robinson,    J.     H.,    Readings    in    European 

History.     L,  266-290. 
g,  —Thatcher  and   McNeal,   A   Source  Book  for 

Medieval  History,  132-160. 
B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Bowden,    J.    W.,    Life    and    Pontificate    of 

Gregory  VII.     Lond.,  1840.     2  vols. 
2. — Greenwood,  T.,  Cathedra  Petri.    IV.,  139-609. 

Lond.,  1861. 
3. — Greisley,  Sir  R.,  The  Life  and  Pontificate  of 

Gregory  VII.     Lond.,  1832. 
4. — Gurney  J.  H.,Four  Ecclesiastical  Biographies. 

Lond.,  1864. 
5. — Lea,  H.  C.,  Sacerdotal  Celibacy  in  the  Christian 

Church.     New  ed. 
6.— McMichael,   N.,    Hildebrand    and   His   Age. 

Edinb.,  1853. 
7. — Schefer,    G.    L.    I.,   Historical  Notice  of  the 

Life  and  Times  of  Pope  Gregory  VII.     Lond., 

1851. 
8. — Stephen,    Sir    J.,    Essays    on    Ecclesiastical 

Biography.     Lond.,  1867. 
9. — Stephens,   W.   R.   W.,  Hildebrand  and  His 

Times.     N.  Y.,  1898. 
10.— Villemain,     A.     F.,    Life    of    Gregory    VII. 

Lond.,  1874.     3  vols. 
11. — Vincent,  M.  R.,  The  Age  of  Hildebrand.      N. 

Y.,  1897. 
11. — general: 

Adams,  Civ.  dur.  M.  A.,  240  ff.,  267,  393, 
414.  Med.  Civ.,  82  ff.  Allen,  ii.,  ch.  3.  Alzog, 
"•,  253-336,  342-367,  481-510.  Bryce,  ch.  x. 
Butler,  ch.  70-72.  Creighton,  i.,  16.  Crooks, 
ch.  33.  Darras,  iii.,  107^.  Dollinger,  iii.,  pd.  4, 
ch.  2,  sec.  1.  Emerton,  ch.  8.  Fisher,  pd.  6,  ch. 
1.  Fitzgerald,  ii.,  54-67.  Foulkes,  ch.  2.  Gib- 
bon, v.,  61,  477;  vi.,  426.  Gieseler,  ii.,  sec.  23; 
iii.  Gilmartin,  ii.,  ch.  1-3.  Gregorovius,  bk. 
vii.,  ch.  5,  6.  Hallam,  ii.,  ch.  5.  Hardwick,  ch. 
6,  sec.  1 ;  ch.  10,  sec.  1.  Hase,  sec.  181.  Hurst, 
i.,  ch.  37.     Jennings,  ii.,  ch.  11.     Knight,  ch.  12. 


Gregory  VII.  and  His  Work  475 

Kurtz,  sec.  94,  96,  101.  Milman,  iii.,  140  ff. 
Moeller,  ii.,  255-265.  Mosheim,  cent.  9,  pt.  2, 
ch.  2.  Neander,  iv.,  82,  86,  123,  131,  134,  146, 
194,  206,  233.  Platina,  Lives  of  Popes,  ii.,  1-12. 
Ranke,  Hist,  of  Pap.,  i.,  29  ff.  Riddle,  ii.,  ch. 
4,  5.  Robertson,  bk.  5,  ch.  1,  2.  Robinson,  ch. 
13.  Tout,  Emp.  and  Pap.,  ch.  5,  6.  Wilkes, 
Hist,  of  Popes.     Workman,  ch.  4. 


CHAPTER  XX 

THE  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  THE  CRUSADES 

Outline:  I. — The  rise  and  spread  of  Mohammedanism.  II. — ■ 
Positive  and  negative  causes  of  the  Crusades.  III. — Character  and 
description  of  the  Crusades.  IV. — Results  and  influences  of  the 
Crusades.     V. — Sources. 

MOHAMMEDANISM, »  like   Judaism  and  Christ- 
ianity, had  its  origin  in  the  Semitic  race.     Its 
birthplace  was  in  Arabia,  a  desert  region.     The 
time  of  its  appearance  was  the  seventh  century,  and 
its  founder  was  Mohammed. 

The  condition  of  Arabia  at  Mohammed's  birth 
(c.  570)  must  be  understood  in  order  to  have  an  in- 
telligent comprehension  of  this  new  religion.  Politi- 
cally the  Arabs  were  united  in  a  very  loose  sort  of 
confederacy.  The  real  government  was  in  the  hands 
of  tribal  chiefs.  Although  a  prey  to  Greek  and  Persian 
influences,  yet  the  hardy  Arabians  had  never  been 
conquered.  They  were  divided  into  wandering  tribes 
with  practices  and  customs  characteristic  of  tribal 
relations.  Few  cities  were  found  among  them  and 
many  of  the  conveniences  of  civilisation  known  to 
peoples  of  fixed  habitations  were  lacking.  Through 
trading,   begging,   and  robbing  these  Arabs  had  de- 

»  Gilman,  The  Saracens;  Ameer  AH,  Life  and  Teachings  of 
Mohammed  and  A  Short  History  of  the  Saracens;  Muir,  Life  of  Mo- 
hammed and  Annals  of  the  Early  Caliphate;  Lane-Poole,  Speeches 
and  Table  Talk  of  the  Prophet  Mohammed;  Gibbon,  v.,  ch.  50,  51; 
various  eds.  of  the  Koran. 

476 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      477 


veloped  a  cosmopolitan  spirit  and  liberality.  They 
monopolised  the  overland  trading  routes;  carried  on 
an  extensive  industry  in  raising  sheep,  horses,  and 
camels;  cultivated  fruit-growing  to  some  extent;  and 
were  very  fond  of  holding  great  fairs  at  which  their 
possessions  were  exhibited  and  bartering  carried  on. 
Educationally  the  Arabs  were  a  very  superior  people. 
Arabia  was  the  home  of  the  alphabet  and  of  numbers, 
and  had  developed  a  perfect  language.  The  people 
had  an  intense  love  for  poetry  and  the  eloquence  of 
their  leaders  was  of  high  order.  From  the  Greeks  they 
had  received  a  knowledge  of  the  natural  and  abstract 
sciences.  Of  all  the  peoples  therefore  in  western  Asia 
the  Arabs  were  perhaps  the  most  highly  civilised  and 
the  most  progressive. 

Complete  religious  liberty  and  toleration  were  per- 
mitted among  the  Arabs,  hence  Jews,  Christians,  Fire- 
worshippers,  and  Star-worshippers  were  found  among 
them.  The  Jews  were  very  numerous  especially  in 
Medina.  The  Christians  found  in  Arabia  were  either 
the  descendants  of  those  heretical  sects  driven  from 
the  Roman  Empire  in  the  fierce  controversies  of  the 
fourth  and  fifth  centuries, 1  or  monks  and  hermits  who 
were  still  found  there  in  large  numbers.2  But  Christ- 
ianity made  little  impression  upon  the  Arabs.  It 
appears  in  fact  never  to  have  fully  satisfied  any  of  the 
Eastern  peoples — at  least  no  branch  of  the  Semitic 
race  has  ever  taken  kindly  to  it. 

The  Arabic  religion  was  something  of  a  mixture 
between  monotheism  and  idolatrous  polytheism.    Every 

1  Among  these  sects  were  Arians,  Sabellians,  Ebionites,  Nestor- 
ians,  Eutychians,  Monophysites,  Marianites,  and  Collyridians. 

2  The  Bible  had  probably  been  translated  into  Arabic  before 
the  Koran  appeared.     Gibbon,  ch.  50. 


478     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


v 


house  had  its  own  idol  and  every  tribe  had  its  special 
deity,  but  above  all  these  particular  gods  stood  the 
universal  god,  Allah,  by  whom  the  holiest  oaths  were 
sworn,  in  whose  name  treaties  were  made,  and  yet  who 
was  worshipped  least  and  last.  Mecca  was  the  religious 
capital,  having  been  selected  by  Hagar  and  Ishmael, 
and  was  the  home  of  the  Kaaba,  built  by  Abraham 
and  his  son  Ishmael,  containing  the  famous  Black 
Stone.1  A  well  organised  priesthood,  monopolised 
by  the  Koraish  tribe,  conducted  worship  and  performed 
the  sacred  rites,  which  were  accompanied  by  a  rather 
elaborate  ceremony.  Great  religious  feasts  were  numer- 
ous, particularly  in  the  "holy  months."  Bytheseventh 
century  the  Arabic  religion  was  in  a  very  low  condition. 
It  resembled  the  decrepid  and  effete  Roman  and  Greek 
religions  in  the  later  days  of  their  existence.  There 
arose  everywhere,  consequently,  a  cry  for  reformation, 
or  for  a  substitution,  and  this  demand  soon  crystallised 
into  a  reform  party,  which  rejected  polytheism  and 
preached  aceticism  while  holding  fast  to  a  belief  in 
Allah.  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  members  of  this 
party  received  both  their  inspiration  and  their  ideas 
from  the  Christian  hermits.  They  were  called  the 
Hanifs  or  Puritans.  This  wide-spread  desire  for  re- 
formation indicates  that  Arabia  was  ripe  for  a  reli- 
gious revolution  and  that  the  times  were  ready  for 
the  great  work  of  Mohammed. 

In  the  holy  city  of  Mecca  in  570  Mohammed  was 
born.  He  was  connected  by  blood  with  the  Koraish 
tribe  and  from  this  source  may  have  inherited  certain 
pronounced  religious  tendencies.  Orphaned  at  six 
and  reared  by  an  uncle,  who  was  a  trader,  he  made 
extensive  travels  of  a  business  character  throughout 

>  Muir,  ii.,  18,  35;  Burckhardt,  Travels,  136. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      479 


western  Asia.  In  this  way  he  gained  a  cosmopolitan 
education,  had  a  wider  outlook  on  the  world  than 
was  customary,  and  may  have  come  into  close  touch 
with  Judaism  and  Christianity.  At  the  age  of  twenty- 
five  he  entered  the  service  of  a  rich  widow,  Chadijah, 
and  later  married  her  though  she  was  fifteen  years  his 
senior.  Her  wealth  brought  him  into  prominence  and 
gave  him  a  commanding  social  and  industrial  position. 
In  his  own  behalf,  now,  he  made  several  extensive 
commercial  trips.  One  of  Chadijah's  cousins  was  a 
Hanif  and,  like  the  Hanifs  and  hermits  in  general,  he 
was  a  zealous  missionary.  Mohammed  soon  fell  under 
the  influence  of  him  and  other  Puritans  and  soon  joined 
these  ascetic  reformers.  He  often  retired  to  the 
mountains  for  prayer  and  ascetic  practices  and  the 
religious  fermentation  in  his  soul  in  a  short  time  pro- 
duced an  explosion.  He  early  became  subject  to  fits, 
— whether  epileptic,  cataleptic,  or  hysterical  is  un- 
known,— and  in  these  swoons  professed  to  have  had 
religious  visions.  In  one  of  these  the  angel  Gabriel 
appeared  to  him  and  communicated  the  new  faith,  the 
sum  of  which  was:  "There  is  but  one  God  and  Mo- 
hammed is  his  prophet." 

Thus  fired  with  a  mighty  mission,  he  began  to  de- 
nounce the  old  religion  and  to  propagate  the  new 
(610).  His  first  convert  was  his  faithful  wife;  then  i 
his  bosom  friend,  Abubekr,  received  the  faith  and  next 
his  adopted  son,  AH.  With  this  trio  of  stanch  believers 
back  of  him,  he  continued  his  public  preaching  of  the 
message  which  had  come  to  him  in  Mecca,  the  very 
heart  of  Arabian  idolatry.  When  his  uncle  and 
benefactor,  Abu  Taleb,  tried  to  persuade  him  to 
desist  the  brave  fanatic  answered:  "Spare  your  re- 
monstrances ;  if  they  should  place  the  sun  on  my  right 


480    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


hand  and  the  moon  on  my  left  they  should  not  divert 
me  from  my  course."  His  converts  increased  among 
his  own  family  and  friends  and  also  among  the  poor 
of  Mecca.  His  activity  and  radical  statements  aroused 
the  enmity  of  the  Koraish  priests  who  sought  to  either 
expel  him  or  to  slay  him.  They  soon  forced  him  to 
depart  from  Mecca  and  to  carry  on  his  propagandism 
among  the  neighbouring  villages.  At  length,  realising 
that  a  price  was  set  on  his  head,  he  escaped  in  622 
to  Medina.  This  is  called  the  Hegira,  or  Flight,  and 
marks  the  beginning  of  the  Mohammedan  chronology. 

Medina  at  this  time  was  in  need  of  a  strong  ruler,  so 
Mohammed  was  given  an  enthusiastic  reception  and 
was  soon  recognised  as  the  head  of  both  church  and 
state.  With  this  new  power  came  a  change  in  the 
method  of  propagating  the  new  religion,  namely,  from 
persuasion  to  the  sword.  Just  what  the  reasons  for 
this  change  were  it  is  not  easy  to  say ;  perhaps  the  leading 
motive  was  that  of  revenge.  At  first  he  began  to  lead 
marauding  expeditions  against  the  merchant  caravans 
of  Mecca.  Soon  he  became  the  prophet  warrior  of  the 
Arabs  and  professed  to  have  orders  from  Allah  to  make 
war  upon  all  idolators.  *  With  this  taste  of  blood 
and  power  Mohammed's  character  and  religion  both 
were  changed.  His  military  enterprises  were  almost 
invariably  successful.  By  630  he  had  captured  Mecca 
and  through  the  great  battle  of  Taif  he  made  himself 
master  of  all  Arabia.  He  consolidated  his  religion  and 
instituted  laws  to  govern  his  people,  and  finally  died 
at  Mecca  in  632. 

Mohammed  was  one  of  the  unique  characters  of 
earth.  Agreeable,  true  to  his  friends,  very  simple  in  his 
domestic  relations,  he  was  deeply  religious  and  certainly 

1  Koran,  Sura  ii.,  189,  214;  xvii.,  4-7. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      481 

at  first  a  sincere  reformer.  His  soul  was  full  of  poetry 
and  his  intellect  at  times  was  frenzied  and  insane. 
When  he  changed  his  method  of  spreading  the  new 
faith  after  the  Hegira,  it  was  not  due  to  hypocrisy,  nor 
to  the  charge  made  that  he  became  an  impostor,  but 
can  be  explained  as  the  outcome  of  a  new  situation  and 
new  influences  which  changed  both  his  views  and  his 
"methods.  Certain  it  is  that  neither  he  nor  any  of  his 
devoted  followers  for  a  moment  questioned  the  reality 
of  the  revelation  which  came  to  him,  nor  of  the  leader- 
ship to  which  he  was  called.  Although  influenced  by 
many  of  the  evils  of  his  age  such  as  deceit,  revenge,  and 
sensuality,  still  he  must  be  viewed  as  an  honest  revolu- 
tionist whose  influence  has  changed  the  history  of  the 
whole  world. 1 

There  are  certainly  many  striking  resemblances 
between  Christianity  and  Mohammedanism.  Both 
believe  in  the  one  eternal  God;  both  accept  the  Old 
Testament;  both  believe  in  a  revealed  religion;  both 
accept  the  historical  person  of  Jesus;  both  believe  in 
the  doctrine  of  immortality ;  and  both  hold  in  common 
many  of  the  highest  moral  virtues.  Because  of  these 
resemblances  to  Judaism  and  Christianity  it  has  been 
claimed  that  Islam  is  chiefly  a  transfusion  of  these  two 
older  religions  into  Arabian  forms.2  Just  how  far 
Mohammed  was  consciously  and  unconsciously  in- 
fluenced by  these  two  faiths,  with  the  chief  tenets  of 
which  he  was  certainly  acquainted,  cannot  be  posi- 
tively stated.     From  a  Christian  standpoint,  however, 

1  Ockley,  Hist,  of  the  Saracens;  Bahador,  Essays  on  the  Life  of 
Mohammed;  Prideaux,  Life  of  Mahomet;  Bush,  Life  of  Mohammed; 
Smith,  Mohammed  and  Mohammedanism;  Bate,  Studies  in  Islam; 
Stobart,  Islam  and  its  Founder;  Rodwell,  The  Koran;  Palmer,  The 
Koran;  Sale,  The  Koran;  etc. 

2  Quarterly  Review,  Oct.,  1869. 


482     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Mohammedanism  has  a  darker  side.  Polygamy  is  per- 
mitted, though  regulated,  and  the  marriage  ties  are 
exceedingly  loose;  consequently,  woman  occupies  a 
very  degraded  position.  Slavery  is  practised  and  en- 
couraged. Islam  commands  war  on  all  unbelievers  and 
the  intolerant  spirit  which  this  engenders  is  perhaps 
the  darkest  blot  on  that  faith.  When  a  comparison 
between  the  resemblances  and  differences  is  made, 
however,  the  former  seem  to  far  outnumber  the  latter. 
The  spread  of  Mohammedanism  is  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  things  in  history.  The  means  used  for  this 
propagation  was  the  sword  and  the  justification  is 
found  in  these  words:  "The  sword  is  the  key  of  heaven 
and  hell;  a  drop  of  blood  shed  in  the  cause  of  Allah,  a 
night  spent  in  arms,  is  of  more  avail  than  two  months 
of  fasting  or  prayer;  whosoever  falls  in  battle,  his  sins 
are  forgiven  and  at  the  day  of  judgment  his  limbs 
shall  be  supplied  by  the  wings  of  angels  and  cherubim." 
Idolators  were  to  be  slain  unmercifully,  but  Jews  and 
Christians  were  given  a  limited  toleration  under  tribute 
upon  submission.  Before  his  death  (632)  Mohammed 
had  subdued  all  of  Arabia.  Under  his  successors  a 
conquest  was  made  of  Palestine  (637),  Syria  (038), 
and  Persia  (710)  in  Asia.  To  the  westward  in  Africa 
Egypt  was  taken  (647)  and  by  707  all  northern  Africa 
was  captured;  and  from  there  the  movement  spread 
inland.  Europe  was  invaded  through  Spain  as  early 
as  711  and  the  new  faith  was  carried  up  to  northern 
France  where  the  Mohammedans  were  repulsed  in  732  in 
the  decisive  battle  of  Tours.  Meanwhile,  as  early  as 
672,  an  attack  was  made  upon  Constantinople,  but  it 
proved  unsuccessful.  Islands  in  the  Mediterranean  were 
taken  and  Italy  was  harassed  for  two  centuries  (9th  to 
nth).     Sicily  was  seized  (827),  Rome  invaded  (846), 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      483 

a  colony  planted  at  Bari  (871),  Salerno  beseiged 
(873),  Beneventum  and  Capua  attacked  (874),  and 
the  Eternal  City  sacked  by  Saracens  under  a  Norman 
leader  as  late  as  1085.  In  the  eleventh  century  the 
Saracens  still  held  southern  Spain  and  all  northern 
Africa  while  the  Seljukian  Turks  had  defeated  the 
Saracens  and  had  taken  possession  of  the  Holy  Land. 
Thus  "Mohammed,  with  a  sword  in  one  hand  and 
the  Koran  in  the  other,  erected  his  throne  on  the 
ruins  of  Christianity  and  of  Rome."1  The  Bible  and 
the  Koran  divided  the  world  into  two  parts,  separated 
by  the  Mediterranean  but  touching  at  the  extremities. 
A  conflict  between  these  two  great  world  forces,  each 
one  imbued  with  a  fanatical  desire  to  spread  its  teaching, 
was  inevitable. 

The  Crusade  movement  was  in  a  certain  sense  the 
high -water  mark  of  the  conflict.  The  causes  of  the 
Crusades  were  both  positive  and  negative: — the  latter 
will  be  taken  up  first  and  enumerated. 

1 .  The  spread  of  Islam  and  the  consequent  terror  and 
hatred  aroused  in  the  Christians,  as  shown  in  Spain, 
France,  Italy,  and  the  Eastern  Empire,  produced  a 
feeling  in  Europe  that  this  great  foe  could  be  checked 
and  thrust  back  only  by  the  union  of  all  European 
nations  in  a  great  holy  war  against  their  oppressors. 
This  feeling  was  intensified  by  the  fact  that  many 
Christians  had  been  captured  and  sold  into  slavery. 

2.  The  fall  of  the  Holy  Land,  with  all  its  sacred 
places,  into  the  hands  of  the  "infidels,"  first  the 
Saracens  and  then  the  Turks,  called  forth  a  cry  of 
horror  and  a  vow  of  revenge  from  all  Christendom. 
Roman  paganism  had  followed  the  Roman  conquest  to 
Palestine  early  in  the  Christian  era.     By  the  fourth 

1  Gibbon,  ch.  50. 


484     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


century,  however,  the  cross  had  triumphed  over  poly- 
theism and  Christian  Emperors  and  pious  persons 
erected  splendid  churches  on  the  holy  places.  Con- 
stantine  and  his  mother  Helena  built  churches  over 
the  cave  where  Jesus  was  born,  over  the  tomb  where 
he  was  buried,  and  in  other  sacred  spots.  It  was  not 
long  until  the  location  of  every  place  in  the  life  of 
Jesus  from  his  birth  to  his  death  was  marked  by  a  little 
shrine,  or  a  chapel,  or  a  costly  church.  At  the  same 
time  many  valuable  relics  were  discovered  such  as  the 
true  cross  and  those  of  the  two  thieves,  the  lance,  the 
sponge,  the  cup,  the  crown  of  thorns,  the  basin  in 
which  the  disciples'  feet  were  washed,  the  stone  on 
which  Jesus  stood  before  Pilate,  the  manger  in  which 
Jesus  was  born,  and  many  others.  It  was  not  long 
until  there  was  a  comparatively  large  Christian  popula- 
tion in  Palestine  made  up  of  the  native  Christians, 
the  hermits  and  their  followers,  and  the  devout  pil- 
grims who  fairly  swarmed  to  the  Holy  Land  from  all 
parts  of  Europe.  The  Persian  King  Chosroes  II. 
in  611  captured  Jerusalem,  destroyed  many  churches, 
put  ninety  thousand  Christians  to  death,  and  carried 
off  the  true  cross.  But  Heraclius  in  628  defeated  the 
Persians,  recovered  the  true  cross  and  restored  it  to 
the  Holy  City  (629). 

The  Saracens  in  637  made  a  conquest  of  Palestine. 
These  Mohammedans  manifested  a  peculiar  reverence 
for  Jerusalem  and  gave  the  Christians  perfect  freedom 
on  condition  that  the  church  bells  should  merely 
toll  not  ring,  that  converts  to  Islamism  should  be 
unmolested,  and  that  the  Christians  should  pay  tribute, 
have  a  distinct  name  and  language,  acknowledge  the 
political  sovereignty  of  the  Caliph,  use  no  saddles  and 
bear  no  arms,  build  no  new  churches,   and  remove 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      485 


the  cross  from  the  outside  of  the  church  buildings. 
Under  these  restrictions  the  Christians  lived  in  com- 
parative security  until  Hakam,  the  mad  Sultan  of 
Egypt,  in  10 10  attempted  to  destroy  Christianity  in 
Jerusalem  by  razing  the  churches,  killing  many  of  the 
followers  of  Christ,  levying  a  tax  on  all  pilgrims, 
and  through  these  acts  inciting  persecutions  of  the 
Jew  in  Europe  where  it  was  believed  that  he  was 
responsible  for  this  change.  Jerusalem  was  captured 
in  1076  by  the  Seljukian  Turks  who  destroyed  the 
churches;  robbed,  insulted,  and  killed  the  Christians! 
replaced  the  lawful  toll  by  extortion;  brutally  inter- 
rupted the  sacred  services;  and  dragged  the  holy 
patriarch  through  the  streets  by  the  hair  and  put  him 
in  a  dungeon  with  the  expectation  of  securing  a  ransom. 
3.  The  enthusiasm  for  pilgrimages  rapidly  increased 
from  the  fourth  to  the  twelfth  century.  This  manifes- 
tation of  religious  reverence  appears  to  have  charac- 
terised all  peoples  at  some  stage  of  their  religious 
history.  Jerome  says  that  Christians  began  to  make 
pilgrimages  to  Jerusalem  directly  after  the  ascension. 
The  desire  to  visit  the  scenes  of  the  Saviour's  life 
spread  like  a  contagion — it  became  the  mania  of  the 
Middle  Ages — so  that  by  the  eleventh  century  a  con- 
stant stream  of  pilgrims  was  going  to  and  from  the 
Holy  Land.  The  journey  was  made  by  individuals1 
called  "Palmers"  who  carried  a  staff,  wallet,  and 
scallop  shell  and  for  whom  there  was  a  special  ceremony 
conducted  by  the  local  priest  or  the  bishop  both  at 
departure  and  home-coming;  by  groups  of  monks, 
or  of  pupils  under  a  teacher ;  and  by  whole  multitudes 
such  as  the  band  of  three  thousand  in  1054  and  seven 
thousand  in   1064.     Among  the  pilgrims  were  found 

1  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  336. 


486     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


all  classes — kings  and  beggars,  male  and  female,  priests 
and  laity.  They  went  either  by  routes  overland 
or  by  sea.  They  were  protected  by  laws  and  were  cared 
for  in  institutions  along  the  way.  Through  the  en- 
dowment by  pious  individuals  hospitals  were  built 
along  the  more  popular  routes.  Monasteries  served 
as  hotels.  The  pilgrims  were  free  from  tolls  and  were 
granted  many  other  privileges. 1  Charles  the  Great  had 
them  protected  within  his  Empire  and  had  a  large  hotel 
built  for  their  accommodation  at  Jerusalem.  It  was 
believed  by  the  faithful  that  such  a  pilgrimage  had  the 
efficacy  of  expiating  all  sin  as  a  penance.  A  bath  in 
the  river  Jordan  was  called  a  second  baptism.  The 
pilgrim  who  had  braved  all  the  hardships  of  a  trip 
to  the  land  of  the  Lord  was  upon  his  return  a  privileged 
character  in  the  community.  His  shirt  was  sacredly 
preserved  to  be  used  for  his  shroud. 

4.  In  addition  to  the  hardships  and  difficulties  of 
travel  the  pilgrim  from  the  seventh  to  the  eleventh 
century  was  subjected  by  the  Mohammedan  authorities 
to  taxation  and  many  indignities.  Under  the  Turks 
after  the  eleventh  century,  robbery,  cruelties  of  all 
sorts,  and  even  murder  with  torture  were  common  ex- 
periences. The  report  of  these  persecutions  produced 
a  marked  effect  on  western  Europe, — on  the  clergy, 
the  ignorant  and  credulous  laity,  and  the  nobles  and 
kings.2 

5 .  The  mercenary  hope  of  reward  offered  by  a  Cru- 
sade against  the  Mohammedans  was  another  powerful 
cause.3     Merchants  hoped  to  open  up  new  fields  for 

1  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  337-340. 

2  Cutts,  Scenes  and  Characters  of  the  Middle  Ages;  Milman,  bk. 
vii.,  224. 

3  Indulgences  for  fighting  heathen  had  been  offered  long  before 
this  time.      See  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  276,  277. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      487 


commerce  and  trade.1  Kings  and  princes  expected 
to  win  rich  provinces  from  the  Turks.  The  Eastern 
Emperor  desired  to  drive  off  a  dangerous  foe  and  to 
regain  his  lost  domains  in  Asia  Minor.  The  Pope  and 
the  bishops  hoped  to  subject  the  Eastern  Church  in 
Palestine  to  the  See  of  St.  Peter.  Merchants  wished 
to  recover  the  very  lucrative  trade  with  the  East  which 
had  been  lost  through  the  Turkish  conquests.  Debtors 
and  criminals  desired  to  receive  relief  and  pardon  or 
to  obtain  wealth  in  plundering  the  "infidels."  Sinners 
thought  of  obtaining  complete  pardon  for  past  sins2 
and  privileges  for  the  future. 

6.  The  militant  spirit  of  the  age  and  the  love  of 
war  were  aroused  to  fever  heat  by  an  unquenchable 
thirst,  for  the  blood  of  the  enemies  of  Christianity.  3 
Charles  Martel  and  Charles  the  Great  had  set  an 
example  in  the  relentless  warfare  waged  by  them 
against  the  Mohammedans.  After  their  time  the 
Spanish  nobles  and  kings  kept  up  the  good  fight  in 
heroic  military  expeditions.  Otto  the  Great  followed 
the  example  of  Charles  the  Great  in  subduing  the 
heathen  of  his  frontiers  by  the  sword.  This  spirit 
was  aroused  to  almost  ungovernable  control  by  the 
many  reports  of  cruelty  reported  on  all  sides  by  the 
returning  pilgrims. 

7.  The  credulity  and.  superstition  of  western 
Europe  were  an  important  factor  in  producing  the 
Crusades.  The.  wildest  legends  were  circulated  concern- 
ing the  barbarities  and  inhumanities  of  the  Moham- 
medans, the  miracles  and  deeds  of  valour,  as  well  as  the 

1  Cunningham,  Western  Civilisation,  ii.,  108. 

2  See  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  274,  275. 

3  Lecky,  Hist,  of  European  Morals,  ii.,  248;  Oman,  The  Art  of 
War  in  the  Middle  Ages. 


488     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


shameless  abuses,  in  the  Holy  Land.  The  "signs" 
of  God's  approbation  of  the  Crusades,  it  was  believed, 
were  to  be  seen  on  every  hand.  Out  of  this  same 
atmosphere  grew  up  the  shameless  traffic  in  relics  which 
was  rampant  in  Europe  and  approved  by  the  Church. l 
Relics  from  the  Holy  Land,  associated  in  one  way 
or  another  with  the  career  of  Jesus,  were  very  numerous 
and  of  very  great  value.  The  Turkish  conquest  had 
had  the  effect  of  reducing  the  quantity  of  relics,  but 
of  increasing  the  price  demanded. 

Among  the  positive  causes  operating  to  produce 
the  Crusades  were : 

i.  The  sincere  zeal  manifested  by  the  Popes  to 
extend  the  true  faith.2  Sylvester  II.  in  999  sounded 
the  first  trumpet  calling  upon  the  warriors  of  all 
Christendom  to  recover  the  Holy  City  of  Jerusalem, 
but  Pisa  alone  made  some  predatory  incursions  on  the 
Syrian  coast.  3  Gregory  VII.  wrote  a  circular  letter 
to  "all  Christians"  in  1074  urging  them  to  drive  the 
Turks  out  of  Palestine.-*  He  planned  to  rule  the 
Eastern  Church,  pledged  fifty  thousand  troops  himself, 
and  offered  to  lead  the  army  in  person,  but  the  Norman 
Robert's  eastern  excursion  (1081-1085)  was  the  only 
fruit. s  Victor  III.  preached  a  crusade  in  1087  and 
promised  a  remission  of  sins  to  all  who  should  take 
part,  but  he  apparently  had  not  yet  struck  the  true 
crusading  chord,  for  Pisa,  Genoa,  and  Venice  alone 
conducted  a  piratical  expedition  against  the  African 

1  Revue  de  V orient  Latin,  1897,  6-21. 

2  Burr,  The  Year  One  Thousand  and  the  Antecedents  of  the  Crusades, 
Am.  Hist.  Rev.,  vol.  vi. 

3  Duchesne,  iii.,  28th  letter;  Bouquet,  ex  426;  Muratori,  iii.,  400. 

4  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  278. 

5  Lib.,  i.,  49;  ii.,  31-37;  Jaffe,  Mon.  Greg.,  i.,  18,  46,  49;  ii.,  3, 
31.  37- 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      489 


coast.  It  was  left  to  Urban  II.  to  successfully  launch 
the  Crusade  movement  in  1095.  He  took  advantage  of 
the  crusading  spirit  already  abroad  in  Europe  and 
called  the  Council  of  Piacenza  (Italy),  which  was 
attended  by  four  thousand  clergy,  thirty  thousand 
laity,  and  envoys  from  the  Eastern  Emperor.  In  an 
eloquent  address  the  Pope  favoured  a  Crusade,  but 
although  many  vows  were  taken,  the  enthusiasm  did  not 
seem  sufficient  to  warrant  the  beginning  of  the  under- 
taking. x  Consequently  another  council  was  called  to 
meet  at  Clermont  in  France  about  six  months  later. 
Urban  himself  was  a  Frenchman  and  believed  that 
an  appeal  to  his  own  people  would  meet  with  more 
success.  There  was  a  mighty  throng  at  Clermont. 
After  devoting  seven  days  to  Church  affairs,  the 
Pope  closed  the  council  by  preaching  his  famous 
sermon  in  the  open  air  to  the  impatient  multitude.  In 
its  results  this  speech  surpassed  all  others  in  the  history 
of  the  world.2  Swayed  by  its  influence  the  whole 
multitude  shouted,  "God  wills  it!  God  wills  it!" 
Then  they  rushed  away  to  seize  all  the  red  cloth  they 
could  lay  their  hands  on  from  which  crosses  were  made 
to  be  sewed  upon  the  bosoms  of  those  who  took  the 
vow  to  wrest  away  from  "The  wicked  race"  the  Holy 
Sepulchre.  Knights  and  foot  soldiers  of  all  ranks 
now  turned  their  attention  to  aid  their  fellow-Christians 
in  the  East  and  to  punish  the  insolent  Turks.  August 
15,  1096,  was  the  day  set  for  the  Crusade.  The  Bishop 
of   Pui,  was  made  the   Pope's  legate  and  Raymond, 

•  Mansi,  801-815;  Muratori,  iii.,  353;  Mon.  Ger.,  v.,  161;  xii., 
394;  Jaffe,  Reg.,  L,  677. 

2  Mansi,  xx.,  815-919;  Jaffe\  Reg.,  i.,  681.  Three  versions  of 
the  speech  may  be  found  in  U.  of  P.  Transl.  and  Reprints,  ii., 
No.  2,  4-5;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  279,  280;  Robinson,  Read- 
ings, vol.  i.,  312. 


49°     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Count  of  Toulouse,  was  appointed  to  lead  the  laity. 1 
The  general  absolution  of  all  sins  was  promised;  the 
"Truce  of  God"  was  proclaimed  and  general  immunity 
and  indulgence  was  given  to  debtors,  criminals,  and 
serfs. 2  Urban  II.  continued  his  travels  and  every- 
where addressed  the  people  urging  them  to  join  in  the 
pious  movement.  His  work  must  be  regarded  as  the 
immediate  cause  of  the  Crusade. 

2.  The  intense  religious  enthusiasm  which  had  pos- 
sessed Europe  for  two  centuries,  touching  all  classes 
and  degenerating  into  fanaticism,  was  the  fundamen- 
tal cause.  Chivalry  made  the  Crusade  a  holy  duty 
to  the  Church  and  furnished  the  noblest  examples  of 
devotion.  The  powerful  reform  spirit  in  the  Church, 
growing  out  of  Clugniac  asceticism  and  the  Hildebrand- 
ine  reformation,  was  an  important  factor  in  the  move- 
ment. The  personal  labours  of  some  individuals  sup- 
plemented the  work  so  well  started  by  Pope  Urban  II. 
Conspicuous  among  these  was  Peter  the  Hermit,  who 
was  formerly  credited  with  having  originated  the 
whole  Crusade  movement,  but  who  was  never  in  Pales- 
tine before  the  Crusades,  did  not  incite  Urban,  did  not 
speak  at  Clermont,  and  did  not  stir  up  all  Europe. 
His  work  was  limited  to  a  few  months  and  to  a  small 
part  of  southern  France,  where  he  rode  through  the 
country  on  an  ass  carrying  before  him  a  great 
crucifix  and  dramatically  appealing  to  the  feelings 
of  the  people.  His  influence  upon  other  parts  of 
France,  however,  must  have  been  considerable  and 
he  deserves  much  credit  for  having  helped  to  call 
together  the  first  army.  Another  enthusiast  who 
laboured  to  spread  the  movement  was  Robert  d'Ar- 

1  Hist.  Occid.,  iv.,  16;  Sybel,  228. 

2  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  281. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      491 


brissel. l     In  the  Second  Crusade  this  work  was  per- 
formed largely  by  Bernard  of  Clairvaux. 

3.  Thousands  in  Europe,  actuated  by  honest  mo- 
tives such  as  the  hope  of  securing  spiritual  benefits, 
the  wish  to  expiate  sins,  the  desire  to  extend  Christianity, 
the  yearning  to  convert  the  Mohammedans,  and  the 
determination  to  overthrow  a  grave  enemy  to  western 
civilisation  and  progress,  gave  their  means  and  their 
lives  to  this  sacred  undertaking.  The  cries  for  help 
which  came  from  the  Christians  in  Jerusalem  and 
from  the  Eastern  Emperor  fell  on  sympathetic  ears. 
All  of  these  forces  and  causes,  operating  in  various 
ways,  produced  the  most  remarkable  manifestation  of 
military  power  coupled  with  religious  fervour  which 
Europe  had  yet  witnessed.  It  seemed  as  if  Moham- 
medanism itself  had  spread  the  contagion  of  its  own 
fanaticism  to  the  followers  of  the  Prince  of  Peace.2 

In  time  the  Crusades  covered  approximately  two 
centuries  from  1096  to  1291.  They  directly  affected 
all  Europe,  northern  Africa,  and  western  Asia.  They 
occurred  in  an  age  when  Europe  was  decentralised 
politically  by  feudalism;  imbued  religiously  with  the 
ardour  and  ideals  of  Hildebrand;  industrially  almost 
wholly  undeveloped ;  educationally  ignorant  and  credu- 
lous; and  socially  controlled  by  monasticism  and 
chivalry.  In  the  Crusades  there  was  an  arrayal 
of  pan-Christianity  against  pan-Mohammedanism,  or 
European  civilisation  versus  Asiatic  civilisation.  The 
Crusades  were,  broadly  speaking,  one  great  movement, 
with  a  series  of  waves,  which  held  the  world's  destiny 
in  its  results  and  which  was  a  natural  manifestation  of 

1  Pothast,  Bib.  Hist.,  ii.,  550. 

2  Hist.   Occid.,   iv.,    12,    13,    135;    Mon.  Ger.,  v.,   161;    xx.,  248; 
xxi.,  56. 


492     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  civilisation  of  the  day  both  from  the  Christian 
and  the  Mohammedan  sides.  The  purpose  of  the 
movement  was  primarily  to  wrest  the  Holy  Land  from 
the  Mohammedans  and  to  restore  it  to  Christianity. 
But  a  great  variety  of  secondary  purposes  and  motives, 
both  good  and  bad,  induced  people  to  co-operate  in  the 
enterprise.  The  devout,  the  romantic,  the  adventurous, 
the  discontented,  the  mercenary,  the  criminal,  and  the 
sinner,  all  took  part  but  for  different  reasons.  From 
the  standpoint  of  the  primary  purpose,  the  Crusades 
were  a  failure ;  but  viewed  from  their  effects  on  civilisa- 
tion they  were  a  success.  It  is  difficult  to  reduce  them 
to  any  specific  number,  though  for  the  sake  of  clearness 
they  may  be  divided  into  four  major  Crusades l  and 
four  minor  Crusades,2  with  an  unclassified  children's 
Crusade.  The  idea  of  a  Crusade  had  been  developed 
by  the  conflict  with  the  Moors  in  Spain,  the  heathen 
Saxons,  the  pagan  Slavs,  and  various  heretical  sects ; 
and  it  was  employed,  after  the  Crusades  ended,  in 
European  history   for  some  centuries  to  come. 

The  Council  of  Clermont  met  in  November,  1095, 
and  immediately  thereafter  enthusiastic  preparations 
were  begun  for  the  First  Crusade.  3   From  March  to  June 

1  Major  Crusades: 

(1)  1096-1099 — led  by  knights  of  France  and  the  Normans. 

(2)  1 1 47-1 1 49 — led  by  kings  of  France  and  Germany. 

(3)  1189-1192 — led  by  kings  of  France,  England,  and  Ger- 

many. 

(4)  1 202-1 204 — led    by    French   nobles   and    the    Doge   of 

Venice. 

2  Minor  Crusades: 

(1)  1216-1220. 

(2)  1228— 1229. 

(3)  1248-1254. 

(4)  1270-1272. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  282,  283;  Robinson,  Readings,  i., 
316;  Ogg,  §52. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      493 

of  the  following  year,  the  rabble  vanguard  was  collecting 
in  France  and  along  the  Rhine— a  motley  crowd  of 
peasants,  artisans,  vagabonds,  and  even  women  and 
children,  all  fanatically  intent  upon  rescuing  the  Holy 
Sepulchre  two  thousand  miles  away  and  confident 
that  God  would  protect  them  on  the  way  and  grant 
them  victory. l  This  miscellaneous  throng  was  entirely 
lacking  in  leadership  and  organisation.  It  broke  up 
into  a  number  of  divisions  united  only  by  their  common 
zeal  and  similar  purpose.  Walter  the  Penniless  at 
the  head  of  fifteen  thousand,  among  whom  were  only 
eight  horsemen,  appears  to  have  led  the  band.  After 
encountering  many  difficulties  in  Hungary  and  over- 
coming grave  dangers  in  Bulgaria,  they  at  length 
arrived  at  Constantinople.  Peter  the  Hermit  with 
forty  thousand  Crusaders  separated  from  Walter 
at  Cologne,  and  followed  the  course  of  the  Danube. 
The  Hungarians  almost  annihilated  these  pious  robbers 
so  that  Peter  with  difficulty  escaped  with  but  one 
fifth  of  his  followers  and  reached  Constantinople  only 
through  the  protection  afforded  them  by  the  Eastern 
Emperor.  Emico,  Count  of  Leiningen,  conducted 
twenty  thousand  Germans,  and  Gotschalk,  the  monk, 
had  about  fifteen  thousand.2  On  the  heels  of  these 
various  advanced  divisions  followed  a  rabble  of  two 
hundred  thousand  among  whom  were  three  thousand 
mounted  knights.  This  unorganised  vanguard  was 
apparently  well  received  in  Constantinople  by  Emperor 
Alexius,  who  hurried  them  across  the  Bosphorus 
only  to  meet  their  destruction  at  the  hand  of  Sultan 
David  in  front  of  Nicaea.  Peter  the  Hermit  and  with 
him  a  band  of  three  thousand  were  fortunate  enough 
to  escape. 

i  Ogg,  §  52.  a  Giesebrecht,  iii.,  656. 


494     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Meanwhile  the  main  body  of  the  Crusaders  was  col- 
lecting, mostly  in  France,  because  the  other  nations 
of  Europe  were  either  preoccupied  or  had  little  enthu- 
siasm for  the  movement.  The  leaders  were  nobles 
and  not  kings. 1  From  the  north  went  forth  Godfrey 
of  Bouillon,  a  wise  and  brave  man  who  with  his 
brothers  Eustace  and  Baldwin  led  thirty  thousand  foot 
and  ten  thousand  horse  from  France  and  Germany; 
Hugh  the  Long,  brother  of  Philip  I. ;  Robert  of  Nor- 
mandy, son  of  William  the  Conqueror ;  Robert  of  Flan- 
ders, "the  sword  and  the  lance"  of  the  Crusades; 
Stephen  of  Chartres,  the  richest  prince  of  France; 
and  a  large  number  of  minor  nobles.  From  the  south 
came  Bohemond,  the  son  of  Robert  Guiscard,  already 
experienced  in  eastern  warfare;  Tancred,  a  cousin  of 
Bohemond,  the  model  knight  and  hero  of  the  move- 
ment ;  Raymond  of  Toulouse,  old  in  war,  brave,  greedy, 
and  proud,  who  led  one  hundred  and  sixty  thousand 
foot  and  horse ;  Adhemar,  Bishop  of  Pui,  the  first  bishop 
to  take  the  cross  and  the  official  representative  of  the 
Pope;  and  many  subordinate  noblemen.  This  vast 
multitude,  estimated  at  one  million  Crusaders,  chiefly 
French,  represented  the  flower  of  western  Europe. 
Whole  families,  especially  of  the  nobles,  arranged  to 
join  the  undertaking.  This  immense  throng  was 
organised  on  feudal  lines.  The  dukes,  counts,  and 
barons  were  the  overlords  and  rulers  and  divided 
the  army  into  parts.  Under  them  served  the  knights 
on  horseback  and  clothed  in  their  long  coats  of  mail. 
They  supplied  the  military  spirit  and  imbued  the  com- 
mon people  with  a  holy  zeal.  Each  knight  was  ac- 
companied by  his  squire  and  a  squad  of  warriors.  Four 
different   routes   were   taken   by   the   Crusaders:    (i) 

>  Gibbon,  ch.  58. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      495 


Hugh,  the  Roberts,  and  Stephen  went  from  the  Alps 
to  Apulia,  where  they  were  met  and  blessed  by  the 
Pope,  then  separated,  and  made  a  scramble  by  land 
and  sea  for  Constantinople.  Hugh  was  held  as 
prisoner  by  Emperor  Alexius  until  he  recognised  the 
feudal  sovereignty  of  the  Eastern  Emperor.  (2)  God- 
frey traversed  Germany,  Hungary,  and  Bulgaria  and 
reached  Constantinople  at  Christmas  time,  1096,  where 
he  made  a  compact  with  Alexius.  (3;  Bohemond  took 
the  sea  route  to  the  eastern  capital.  He  was  incensed 
at  the  compromise  made  by  his  colleagues  with  the 
Eastern  Emperor,  but  was  finally  won  over  by  bribery. 
(4)  Raymond,  the  last  to  set  out,  went  via  Lombardy, 
Dalmatia,  and  Slavonia,  but  was  greatly  hindered 
by  the  hostility  of  the  natives  incited  by  Alexius,  to 
whom  Raymond,  upon  learning  of  his  treachery, 
refused  homage. 

The  policy  of  the  Eastern  Emperor  Alexius  in  deal- 
ing with  the  Crusaders  appears  to  have  been  a  double 
one.  He  had  called  on  the  West  for  aid  against 
the  Turks  and  was  answered  by  an  armed  horde  that 
threatened  to  sweep  away  his  very  throne.  He  had 
easily  rid  himself  of  the  rabble  vanguard  by  sending 
them  to  their  doom  in  Asia  Minor.  He  was  determined 
now,  if  possible,  to  impede  the  march  of  these  new 
forces  toward  Constantinople.  Not  succeeding  in  that 
he  attempted  to  compel  them  to  swear  fealty  to  him 
and  then  to  use  them  to  drive  back  the  Turks  and  to 
restore  his  lands.  He  was  a  master  diplomat  and 
politician  and  soon  hurried  the  Crusaders  across  the 
Bosphorus.  They  laid  seige  to  Nicaea  and  in  June, 
1097,  it  fell.  After  the  battle  of  Dorylseum  (July  4, 
1097),  Antioch  was  captured  in  June,  1098.  In  July 
of  the  following  year   (1099)    came  the  storming  of 


496      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Jerusalem  and  its  capture  with  the  accompanying 
massacre  of  the  Mohammedans  and  Jews.  The  Latin 
Kingdom  of  Jerusalem  was  created  and  Godfrey 
was  elected  Defender  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre.  With  him 
was  left  a  guard  of  defence  consisting  of  two  hundred 
knights  and  two  thousand  archers.  A  comparatively 
small  number  of  Crusaders,  who  had  survived  the 
hardships  of  the  three  years'  campaign,  then  returned 
home. 1 

The  occasion  and  cause  of  the  Second  Crusade  was 
the  fall  of  Edessa  in  1145  into  Mohammedan  hands. 
Jerusalem  was  next  threatened  by  the  Moslems  and 
was  in  grave  danger  of  meeting  a  similar  fate.  The 
western  Christians,  inspired  by  thrilling  accounts  of 
the  survivers  of  the  First  Crusade,  and  actuated  by  the 
usual  variety  of  motives,  were  eager  to  imitate  the 
earlier  heroes.  Great  enthusiasm  was  aroused  through 
the  preaching  of  St.  Bernard2  (b.  1091-d.  n 53),  the 
son  of  a  Burgundian  knight  slain  in  the  First  Crusade, 
and  a  fanatic  in  ascetic  severities,  who,  when  Edessa 
fell,  had  been  commissioned  by  the  Pope  to  preach  a 
Crusade.  His  fiery  addresses,  kindling  a  crusading 
mania  in  France  and  Germany,  were  supplemented  by 
a  letter  from  Pope  Eugenius  III.  to  western  Christen- 
dom. 3  The  leaders  of  the  Second  Crusade  were  Louis 
VII.  of  France  and  Conrad  III.  of  Germany,  who  rallied 
their  forces  at  Mainz  and  Ratisbon.     Conrad  III.  took 

1  Ders,  Med.  Topog.  of  Palestine;  Condor,  The  Latin  Kingdom 
of  Jerusalem.  See  letters  of  Crusaders  in  Robinson,  Readings,  i., 
321;  Transl.  and  Reprints,  i.,  No.  iv.;  Ogg,  §  53. 

2  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  330;  Mabillon,  Life  and  Letters  of  St. 
Bernard. 

3  Storrs,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux;  Morison,  The  Life  and  Times  of 
St.  Bernard;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  284;  Robinson,  Readings, 
i-.  337- 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      497 


the  old  route  through  Hungary  and  crossed  to  Asia 
without  entering  Constantinople,  because  he  suspected 
the  duplicity  of  the  Eastern  Emperor.  After  him 
came  the  French  over  the  same  ground.  Nothing 
was  accomplished,  however,  and  after  a  miserable 
failure  the  monarchs  with  their  few  survivors  returned 
home. 

The  occasion  for  the  Third  Crusade  was  the  capture 
of  Jerusalem  in  1187  by  Saladin,  the  bravest  and  most 
honoured  of  all  the  Saracen  rulers.  Once  more  Europe 
was  aroused  to  a  pitch  of  pious  frenzy.  *  The  leader- 
ship of  the  enterprise  was  assumed  by  Richard  I.  of 
England,  Philip  Augustus  of  France,  and  Frederick 
Barbarossa  of  Germany.  In  England  Richard  I. 
prepared  for  the  undertaking  by  selling  tithes,  royal 
dignities,  and  lands ;  by  robbing  the  Jews ;  by  taxing  all 
classes2;  and  by  even  threatening  to  sell  the  city  of 
London.  Equal  zeal  was  shown  in  France  and  Ger- 
many. Richard  and  Philip  with  one  hundred  thou- 
sand men  took  the  sea  route  from  Marseilles  and 
Genoa,  while  Frederick  took  the  usual  overland  route. 
Frederick  Barbarossa  met  his  death  in  this  pious 
undertaking  and  this  led  to  the  failure  of  the  German 
effort.  The  estrangement  of  Richard  and  Philip  re- 
sulted, after  the  fall  of  Acre,  July  12,  1191,  in  the  re- 
turn of  Philip  to  France.  Richard  alone  remained  and 
succeeded  in  1192  in  concluding  a  truce  with  Saladin 
by  which  Christian  pilgrims  were  permitted  to  visit 
the  holy  places  with  safety  and  comfort.  3 

The  Fourth  Crusade  was  due  largely  to  the  personal 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  285. 

2  Henderson,  Hist.  Docs,  of  the  Mid.  Ages,  135. 

3  Richard  had  a  very  romantic  adventure  in  returning  to  England. 
For  his  prowess  see  Colby,  Source  Book,  68-70. 

32 


498     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


influence  of  Innocent  III.1  Additional  causes  were 
the  abortive  effort  of  Emperor  Henry  VI.  (11 96-1 197) 
and  the  preaching  of  the  priest  Fulk,  of  Neuilly.  The 
leaders  of  the  movement  at  the  outset  were  French 
nobles,  who  lacked  money  with  which  to  finance  the 
enterprise  and  therefore  made  a  contract  with  the 
Venetians  who  agreed  to  supply  ships  and  food  for  a 
stipulated  sum.2  But  when  the  Crusaders  reached 
Venice,  being  unable  to  raise  the  amount  agreed  upon, 
the  Venetians  proposed  that  in  lieu  of  the  payment 
the  Crusaders  assist  in  reducing  to  submission  the 
rebellious  city  of  Zara.  That  was  accomplished 
in  November,  1202,  in  the  face  of  papal  opposition, 
and  then  the  expedition  moved  on  to  the  capture  and 
sack  of  Constantinople  in  April,  1204.  The  Latin 
Empire  of  Constantinople  was  then  created  and  a  Ven- 
etian elected  as  patriarch,  but  the  Holy  Land  was  not 
even  reached.  Of  all  the  Crusades  this  appears  to  have 
been  the  most  mercenary  and  the  least  fruitful  of 
results. 3 

Of  the  minor  Crusades  the  fifth  was  inspired  by  the 
zeal  of  Pope  Innocent  III. ;  the  sixth  was  due  to  the 
ambition  of  Emperor  Frederick  II. ;  the  seventh  was 
occasioned  by  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the  pious 
enthusiasm  of  Louis  IX. 4  ;  and  the  eighth  resulted  from 
the  vow  of  Louis  IX.  and  a  dream  of  Prince  Edward. 
The  leaders  of  these  later  Crusades  were  all  kings.     The 

1  Henderson,  Hist.  Docs,  of  the  Mid.  Ages,  337;  Transl.  and 
Rep.,  iii.,  No.  1. 

2  Transl.  and  Rep.,  hi.,  No.  1,  pp.  6-17. 

3  Pears,  The  Fall  of  Constantinople;  Oman,  Byzantine  Empire; 
Finlay,  Hist,  of  Greece;  Gibbon,  ch.  60;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No. 
286,  287,  288;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  338. 

4  Perry,  St.  Louis;  Davis,  The  Invasion  of  Egypt  in  A.  D.  1241 
by  Louis  IX. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      499 


fifth  and  seventh  resulted  in  defeat  and  failure  in 
Egypt ;  the  sixth  captured  Jerusalem  and  a  few  other 
cities;  the  eighth  recovered  Nazareth  and  secured  a 
treaty  favourable  to  Christians.  The  end  of  the 
Crusade  period  practically  came  when  in  1291  Acre, 
the  last  city  held  by  the  Christians,  was  captured  by 
the  Mohammedans.  The  later  Popes  of  the  thirteenth, 
fourteenth,  and  fifteenth  centuries  repeatedly  called 
upon  Christendom  to  arm  against  the  Moslems.  Several 
of  the  kings  of  France  even  took  the  cross  and  proclaimed 
Crusades,  but  it  was  done  usually  only  to  squeeze  a 
tax  out  of  the  people.  The  Crusades  had  failed  after 
millions  in  life  and  money  had  been  lost.  The  people 
at  length  lost  faith  in  the  movement.  Crusades  in 
Europe,  not  so  dangerous  as  those  against  the  Holy 
Land,  were  declared  to  be  as  efficacious  as  those  of  a  more 
hazardous  character.  The  rise  of  national  states  kept 
kings  and  subjects  occupied  at  home.  International 
relations  made  it  dangerous  for  countries  to  send  huge 
armies  abroad.  There  had  come  about  a  gradual 
decline  of  fanatical  crusading  zeal — "The  flame  of 
fanaticism  had  slowly  burned  out. "  The  religious  needs 
were  now  satisfied  by  the  relics,  Gethsemanes,  Via 
Dolorosas,  and  Calvaries  found  in  Europe.  The  sale 
of  indulgences  made  it  unnecessary  to  go  to  Jerusalem 
to  win  religious  peace  for  sinful  souls.  The  marvellous 
development  of  Europe  in  every  direction  caused  her 
to  forget  all  about  the  Holy  War  and  left  no  surplus 
energy  for  such  far-away  undertakings.  The  warrior 
became  the  trader. 

The  failure  of  the  Crusade  movement  was  due  to 
many  influences.  There  was  an  utter  lack  of  organi- 
sation and  the  various  movements  seemed  lawless 
and  mob-like,  due    perhaps   to   the  feudalistic  basis. 


500    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  able  leaders  were  too  few  and  the  frequent  petty 
quarrels  among  those  in  command  demoralised  the 
forces.  The  common  good  was  sacrificed  in  too 
many  cases  to  personal,  political,  and  commercial 
greed.  The  struggle  between  the  German  Emperor 
and  the  Pope  prevented  concerted  action  on  the  part  of 
Europe.  The  treachery  and  inactivity  of  the  Eastern 
Emperor  had  much  to  do  with  the  final  outcome. 
The  difficulty  of  colonising  so  large  an  area  and  of 
absorbing  the  Mohammedan  population,  or  of  even 
controlling  it,  was  an  important  factor  in  the  result. 
Then,  too,  the  strength  and  activity  of  the  Moham- 
medan forces,  an  element  usually  overlooked,  played 
no  small  part.  As  time  passed  the  gradual  indifference 
and  the  loss  of  interest  in  the  enterprise  account  for 
the  unfortunate  ending. 

The  Crusades  are  not  so  important  because  of  the 
character  of  the  movement,  but  because  of  the  signifi- 
cance of  their  results  and  influences. 1  Perhaps  the 
most  important  results  were  along  religious  lines. 
Temporarily  the  Latin  Church  was  extended  to  the  Holy 
Land  and  Constantinople,  while  the  Pope  was  made 
the  head  of  united  Christendom,  although  ultimately 
the  breach  between  the  Greek  and  Latin  churches  was 
widened  and  never  again  effectually  healed.  The 
Crusade  movement  enabled  Innocent  III.  to  largely 
attain  the  ideal  of  Hildebrand  as  absolute  master  of 
Christendom.  The  longest,  bloodiest,  and  most  de- 
structive religious  war  in  all  history  was  originated 
by  the  head  of  the  Church.  Through  the  power  thus 
gained  the  Pope  was  able  to  make  himself  the  dictator 
of  Emperors,  kings,  and  nobles.  As  never  before  he 
regulated  the  life  of  all  Europe  for  two  centuries  and 

1  Guizot,  Hist,  of  Civ.  in  Europe,  Lect.  8;  Kitchin,  Hist,  of  France. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      501 

created  a  religious  enthusiasm  which  sanctioned  all  his 
acts  and  pretensions.  The  wealth  of  the  Church 
was  multiplied  through  the  foreclosing  of  countless 
mortgages ;  through  large  gifts  from  the  living  and  the 
dying;  and  through  conquests  of  lands  and  cities. 
Many  innovations  were  introduced  into  the  Church. 
The  legatine  power  of  the  Pope  was  developed ;  bishops 
in  partibus  in  fidelium  were  appointed  in  the  East  and 
after  the  failure  of  the  Crusades  fled  to  Rome  where 
they  were  made  vicar-generals ;  the  sale  of  indulgences 
became  a  regular  traffic ;  heretics  in  Europe  were  dealt 
with  by  crusades  and  the  Inquisition ;  and  the  Moham- 
medan idea  of  salvation  was  introduced.  The  Crusades 
brutalised  the  Church  and  developed  the  spirit  of  in- 
tolerance, bigotry,  and  persecution.  For  two  hundred 
years  the  deeds  of  the  Crusaders  were  sanctioned  by 
the  Pope  as  pleasing  to  God.  The  persecution  of  Jews 
in  Europe  was  somewhat  common  and  apparently 
approved  of  by  the  Church. l  Certain  it  is  that  the 
Pope  ordered  crusades  in  Europe  against  heretics, 
like  the  Albigenses,  and  instituted  the  Inquisition  to 
suppress  them ;  against  pagans  in  the  north-east ;  and 
against  one  refractory  prince  by  another. 

Superstition  and  credulity  were  increased  and  the 
traffic  in  relics  was  something  enormous.  "The  Western 
world  was  deluged  by  corporeal  fragments  of  departed 
saints."  "Every  city  had  a  warehouse  of  the  dead." 
A  belief  in  the  miraculous  and  in  the  number  of  miracles 
was  greatly  increased.  The  worship  of  saints  and 
of  images  became  so  wide-spread  and  general  that 
there  was  a  veritable  craze  for  the  shrines  of  saints 
and  pilgrimages   in   Europe   were   greatly  multiplied. 

1  Neubauer  and  Stern,  Hebraische  Berichts  uber  die  Judenver- 
folgungen  wdhrend  des  Kreuzzuge. 


502     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval     Church 

Through  the  Crusades  monasticism  and  chivalry  were 
combined  to  form  new  religious  orders  like  the  Hospital- 
ers, Templars,  and  Teutonic  Knights.  A  marked  effect 
was  left  upon  the  theology  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The 
"Suffering  Christ"  developed,  as  is  seen  in  the  pictures 
and  crucifixes,  because  hundreds  of  thousands  had 
seen  where  Christ  was  born  and  crucified  and  hence 
had  excited  the  imagination  of  western  Europe.  The 
Crusades  led  likewise  to  a  reformation  within  the 
Church  by  producing  a  general  intellectual  awakening, 
by  sanctioning  many  abuses  which  soon  produced 
a  reaction,  and  by  leading  to  a  denunciation  of  all 
the  corruption  of  the  Church  developed  through  its 
wealth  and  power.  This  reformation  was  carried 
on  largely  by  the  Franciscans  and  Dominicans.  Mo- 
hammedanism was  prevented  from  making  further 
aggressions  on  Europe  for  nearly  four  centuries  and 
many  Christians  came  to  regard  that  faith  more  sym- 
pathetically, if  not  with  some  degree  of  respect,  for 
the  Koran  was  translated  into  Latin  in  the  middle  of 
the  twelfth  century. 1 

Politically  the  Crusades  settled  the  question  whether 
Europe  or  Asia  should  rule  the  world.  They  failed 
to  free  the  Holy  Land,  but  did  free  Europe  from 
Islam.  They  established  the  western  rule  in  the  East 
at  least  temporarily,  first  in  the  Latin  Kingdom  of 
Jerusalem  (1099-1291)  and  secondly  in  the  Latin 
Kingdom  of  Constantinople.  They  prolonged  the  life 
of  the  Eastern  Empire  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  and 
taught  the  Greeks  to  use  the  Latin  methods  of  warfare. 
For  a  time  at  least  they  subjected  the  political  powers 
of  Europe  to  the  Papacy  under  Innocent  III.,  but 

1  The  results  of  the  Crusades  ought  to  be  viewed  also  from  the 
Mohammedan  side. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      503 


a  reaction  soon  followed.  They  helped  the  rise  of  / 
national  states  on  a  monarchial  basis.  Kings  were 
able  to  emphasise  national  unity  and  to  increase  their 
power  and  popularity  by  leading  Crusades  in  person. 
Many  powerful  feudal  lords,  who  divided  sovereign 
power  with  the  king,  were  killed  or  returned  impov- 
erished and  were  unable  to  recover  their  power.  Patri- 
otism was  developed  and  national  hatreds  accentuated. 
The  abolition  of  private  wars  through  the  "Truce  of 
God ' '  promoted  the  growth  of  nationality.  By  the  close 
of  the  period  Spain,  France,  and  England  were  well  on 
their  way  toward  the  rise  of  a  national  state,  while  even 
Germany  and  Italy  felt  the  yearnings  of  nationality. 
The  Crusades  tended  to  overthrow  feudalism  by  the 
death  of  so  many  feudal  lords;  by  detaining  some  of 
the  most  powerful  as  rulers  in  the  East ;  by  causing  the 
loss  of  property  through  unredeemed  mortgages;  by 
the  increasing  power  of  kings ;  by  the  rise  of  free  cities ; 
by  the  emancipation  of  serfs  and  vassals ;  by  the  forma- 
tion of  standing  armies;  and  by  the  new  civilisation 
which  resulted.  Since  the  Crusades  were  European 
movements  against  a  common  foe,  a  new  meaning,  was 
given  to  international  relations.  For  two  hundred  years 
after  the  close  of  the  holy  wars  Europe  was  blessed 
with  international  peace.  The  respect  and  hatred  of 
each  nation  for  the  others  were  strengthened  by  the 
associations  and  quarrels  of  kings  and  peoples.  The 
estrangement  between  the  Eastern  Empire  and  the 
West  became  more  pronounced.  Many  important 
changes  were  made  in  the  art  and  practice  of  war. l 
There  was  a  marked  revival  of  the  study  of  law  as  a 
result  of  the  creation  of  law  colleges  and  court  lawyers 
soon  became  numerous  and  powerful.     The  freedom 

1  Oman,  Art  of  War  in  the  Middle  Ages. 


504     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


of  the  common  people  was  promoted  by  the  overthrow 
of  the  feudal  system;  by  the  growth  of  free  towns  and 
cities  which  usually  formed  an  alliance  with  the  crown 
against  the  nobles;  and  by  the  emancipation  from 
serfdom  which  resulted  from  assuming  the  cross.  The 
kings,  as  a  matter  of  self-interest,  championed  the 
cause  of  the  common  people.  Louis  VII.  of  France 
(1131-1180)  declared  that  all  men  had  "A  certain  nat- 
ural liberty,  only  to  be  forfeited  through  crime." 
Bologna  in  1256  gave  liberty  to  all  within  her  walls 
because  "None  but  the  free  should  dwell  in  a  free 
city."  Florence  in  1280  followed  the  example  of 
Bologna.  Louis  X.  in  13 15  enfranchised  all  since 
"By  the  law  of  nature  all  ought  to  be  free."  And 
Philip  VI.  (1 293-1350)  made  the  same  declaration 
"In  the  name  of  equality  and  natural  liberty."  A 
similar  -wave  was  felt  in  England.1  The  House  of 
Commons,  created  in  England  in  1295,  marks  the 
beginning  of  representative  government  and  in  1302 
the  third  estate  was  given  a  voice  in  France. 

Intellectually  western  Europe  was  far  behind  the 
Greeks  and  Arabs  in  education,  culture,  literature, 
science,  and  art,  hence  intercourse  for  two  hundred 
years  with  these  peoples  made  a  marked  difference  in 
European  civilisation.  The  minds  of  the  Crusaders 
were  liberalised  by  seeing  different  peoples,  lands, 
customs,  and  civilisations  often  superior  to  their  own. 
The  fanatical  hate  and  bigotry  of  the  early  Crusades 
were  modified  by  coming  to  know  the  Mohammedan 
religion  and  the  eastern  ideas. 2 

The  knowledge  of  the  West  was  increased  in  geo- 

«  Stubbs,  ii.,  128. 

2  Prutz,  Kulturgesch.  der  Kreuzzuge ;  Draper,  Intel.  Develop,  of 
Europe,  ch.  11,  13,  16. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      505 


graphy  and  led  indirectly  to  travels  eastward  by  Marco 
Polo  and  westward  by  Columbus,  Magellan,  De  Gama, 
and  others;  in  sociology,  trade,  agriculture,  and  manu- 
facturing; in  political  science;  in  mathematics,  astron- 
omy, physics,  chemistry,  zoology,  medicine  and  drugs; 
in  literature  by  bringing  back  traditions  about  great 
events  like  the  fall  of  Troy,  tales  of  heroes  like  Solomon 
and  Alexander  the  Great,  reports  about  crusading  deeds 
of  valour,  an  infinite  number  and  variety  of  miracles, 
saintly  tales,  and  pious  acts,  and  Greek  books  like 
Aristotle  and  Arabic  poetry  translated  into  Latin ;  in  art 
and  architecture  by  carrying  Eastern  styles  and  types 
to  western  Europe.  The  Crusaders  preserved  the  monu- 
ments of  Greek  learning  from  destruction  at  the  hands 
of  the  Turks  until  western  Europe  was  advanced  enough 
to  receive  and  appreciate  them,  though,  as  a  rule,  the 
Crusaders  disdained  the  language  and  literature  of 
both  Arabs  and  Greeks.  The  Latin  language  was 
again  diffused  over  Greece  and  Palestine.  Indirectly 
the  Crusades  produced  the  Renaissance. 

The  social  results,  while  not  so  immediate  and  pro- 
nounced, were  nevertheless  very  important.  The 
destruction  of  feudalism  tended  to  break  down  social 
barriers  and  draw  social  extremes  more  closely  together; 
to  abolish  many  social  abuses ;  and  to  improve  the  social 
condition  of  the  masses.  The  rise  of  free  cities  tended 
to  associate  social  equality  with  municipal  liberty. 
Through  the  Crusades  serfs  were  emancipated  by  assum- 
ing the  cross;  by  being  made  day  labourers  in  the 
absence  of  free  men ;  and  by  passing  into  the  hands  of 
free  cities,  the  Church,  or  the  king.  At  the  same  time 
social  distinctions  and  barriers  were  weakened  by  mak- 
ing all  Crusaders  members  of  a  common  army  under 
the  Pope  and  by  the  common  enthusiasm,  experiences, 


506     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


dangers,  and  long  continued  association  of  all  classes. 
Chivalry,  too,  was  developed  in  its  best  form  and 
through  it  originated  many  of  our  noblest  social 
virtues  and  sentiments.  The  wealth,  the  luxuries, 
and  the  ornamental  and  useful  arts  brought  from  the 
East  added  greatly  to  the  comfort  and  happiness  of 
the  West.  Through  this  movement  many  valuable 
charitable  institutions  were  likewise  created.  It  must 
not  be  forgotten,  however,  that  the  death  of  hundreds 
of  thousands  in  these  holy  wars  left  sorrow  and  poverty 
in  many  homes  and  filled  western  Europe  with  widows 
and  orphans.  The  debtor  and  criminal  classes  were 
given  a  chance  to  gain  wealth  and  salvation  in  a  popular 
cause  and  eagerly  embraced  the  opportunity.  The 
Crusades  also  gave  rise  to  such  great  socialistic  move- 
ments as  the  begging  orders,  the  Pastoraux  led  by 
the  Hungarians  in  1251,  the  Flagellants  (1259),  and 
the  Albigenses. l 

Industrially  the  material  welfare  of  stagnant  western 
Europe  was  increased  by  the  great  impulse  given  to 
trade  and  by  the  widening  of  commercial  relations. 
Through  trading  with  the  East,  acting  as  the  mediums  of 
distribution  for  northern  and  western  Europe,  and 
supplying  the  needs  of  the  Crusaders,  cities  like  Venice, 
Pisa,  and  Genoa  became  immensely  rich.  The  cities  of 
Germany,  France,  and  England  in  turn  became  second- 
ary centres  of  trade.  The  Hanseatic  League  was 
formed  in  the  thirteenth  century.  Manufacturing 
received  a  strong  impetus;  shipbuilding  flourished, 
and  factories  for  armour  and  arms  and  leather  and 
cloth  goods  sprang  up.  These  new  branches  of  in- 
dustry were  found  chiefly  in  the  free  cities  where  they 
were  controlled  by  the  guilds.     Agriculture  and  horti- 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  269,  272. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      507 


i^ 


culture  were  much  improved  by  new  plants,  grains,  and 
fruits  from  the  East  and  by  the  importation  of  such 
useful  aids  as  the  windmill  and  the  mule.  Fortunes 
were  lost  by  the  nobles  and  amassed  by  the  Church, 
the  Jews,  the  free  cities,  and  the  kings.  The  coinage 
system  was  improved  and  banking  appears  to  have 
been  for  the  first  time  introduced.  The  militant  spirit 
of  the  nation  was  aroused  and  for  two  centuries  war 
was  made  the  chief  occupation  of  Europe. * 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1 .  — Chronicles  of  the  Crusades.   Bohn,  Antiq.  Lib., 

Lond.,  1848. 
2. — Early  Travels  in  Palestine.     lb. 
3. — Marco  Polo's  Travels.     lb. 
4. — Roger    of    Hovenden,    Annals    of    English 

History  (to  1201).     lb. 
5. — Roger  of  Wendover,  Flowers  of  History  (to 

1235).     lb. 
6. — Matthew     Paris,    English    History    (1235- 

1273).     lb. 
7. — Matthew  of  Westminster,  Flowers  of  History 

(to  1307).     lb. 
8.  —  William   of   Malmesbury,    Chronicles  of   the 

Kings  of  England  (to  Stephen).     lb. 
9. — Henderson,  E.    F.,    Select   Historical   Docu- 
ments of  the  Middle  Ages.     N.  Y.,  1892. 
10. — Univ.  of  Penn.,  Translations  and  Reprints,  i., 

No.  2  and  4;  iii.,  No.  1. 
1 1 .  — Palestine  Pilgrim  Text  Society.     Lond.  ,1897 

ff-.,  14  vols. 
12. — Pinkerton,  J.,  A  General  Collection  .  .  .  of 

Travels.     Lond.,  1808-14,  17  vols. 
13. — William   of   Tyre,    Godeffray  of   Boloyne   or 

the  Siege  and  Conquest  of  Jerusalem.     Tr.  by 

W.  Caxton,  1481.     Ed.  by     M.     N.     Colvin. 

Lond.,  1893. 

1  The  results  of  the  Crusades  may  with  profit  be  classified  as  (1) 
positive  and  negative,  (2)  direct  and  indirect,  (3)  immediate  and 
remote,  and  (4)  permanent  and  transitory. 


508     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


15 
16 

17 


i4.— Purchas,    S.,    A    Supplement    of    the   Holy 
Land  Story  (from  Wm.  of  Tyre).    Lond.,  1625. 
— Archer,   T.   A.,   The  Crusade  of  Richard  I. 
(1189-92).     N.  Y.,  1888. 

-Robinson,  Readings  in  European  History,  i., 
ch.  15. 
,— Thatcher     and     McNeal,     Source    Book     of 

Medieval  History,  510. 
.— Ogg,  Source  Book  of  Medieval  History,  N.  Y., 
1908. 
B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1.— Archer,'  T.  A.,  and   Kingsford,   C.   L.,   The 

Crusades.     N.  Y.,  1894. 
2.— Balzani,  U.,  The  Popes  and  the  Hohenstauffen. 

Lond.,  1889. 
3. — Conder,  C.  R.,  The  Latin  Kingdom  of  Jerusa- 
lem (1099-1291).     Lond.,  1897. 
4.— Cox,  G.  W.,  The  Crusades.     N.  Y.,  1879. 
5.— Douglas,  A.  M.,  The  Heroes  of  the  Crusades. 

Bost.,  1889. 
6.— Dutton,    W.    E.,    History   of    the   Crusades. 

Lond.,  1877. 
7.— Frith,  H.,  Story  of  the  Crusades.     N.  Y.,  1885. 
8. — Gibbon,  E.,  History  of  the  Crusades  (1095- 

1216).     Lond.,  1880. 
9. — Gray,  G.  E.,  The  Crusade  of  the  Children  in 
the  Thirteenth  Century.     N.  Y.,  1870. 
10.— Heeren,  A.  H.  L.,  Essay  on  the  Influence  of 

the  Crusades. 
11.— Keeling,  A.  E.,  The  Nine  Famous  Crusades 

of  the  Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1889. 
1 2 .  — Keightley ,  T. ,  The  Crusades.     2  vols.     Lond. , 

1847. 
13. — Lane-Poole,    Saladin    and    the    Fall   of    the 

Kingdom  of  Jerusalem.     N.  Y.,  1898. 
14.— Ludlow,  J.    M.,   The  Age   of  the  Crusades. 

N.  Y.,  1897. 
15. — Merrill,  G.  E.,  Crusades  and  Captives.     Bost., 

1890. 
16.—  Michaud,  J.  F.,  History  of  the  Crusades.     3 

vols.     N.  Y.,  1 881. 
17. — Mills,   C,   History  of   the  Crusades.     Lond., 
1828. 


The  Significance  of  the  Crusades      509 


1 8.—  Mombert,    J.    I.,    A    Short    History    of    the 

Crusades.     N.  Y.,  1894. 
19. — Neal,  J.  M.,  Stories  of  the  Crusades.     Lond., 

1848. 
20. — Oman,   C.   W.   C,   The  Art  of  War  in  the 

Middle  Ages.     Lond.,  1885. 
2  r .  — Pears,  E. ,  The  Fall  of  Constantinople.     N.  Y. , 

1886. 
22.  — Perry,  G.  G.,  History  of  the  Crusades.     Lond., 

1872. 
23.— Porter,    W.,    A    History   of   the   Knights   of 

Malta.     Lond.,  1883. 
24. — Proctor,  G.,  History  of  the  Crusades.     Phil., 

1854. 
2  5 .  — Storrs,  R.S. ,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux.  N.  Y.  ,1892. 
26. — Sybel,  H.  von,  History  and  Literature  of   the 

Crusades.     Lond.,  1861. 
27. — Winslow,  M.  E.,  The  Fate  of  the  Innocents: 

a  Romance  of  the  Crusades.     Phil.,  1889. 

11. — general: 

Adams,  Civ.  dur.  M.  A.,  ch.  11.  Med.  Civ., 
ch.  9.  Allen,  ii.,  ch.  4.  Alzog,  ii.,  371-376. 
Ameer  AH,  Short  Hist,  of  Saracens,  320,  359. 
Bryce,  164,  191,  205,  301,  326,  341.  Chantrel, 
per.  4ch.  1,  2.  Coxe,  lect.  5,  sec.  12-14.  Creigh- 
ton,  ch.  1.  Darras,  iii.,  137,  162,  243,  299, 
33°>  346,  357.  .37°,  394,  397-  Dollinger,  iii., 
per.  4,  ch.  2;  iv.,  per.  4,  ch.  3.  Emerton,  ch. 
11.  Fisher,  186,  188,  191,  193,  194,  196, 
201,  225,  230,  231.  Foulkes,  ch.  11.  Gibbon, 
v.,  ch.  58;  vi.,  ch.  59-61.  Gieseler,  iii.  Gil- 
martin,  ii.,  ch.  8,  9.  Greenwood,  bk.  xi., 
ch.  4,  5;  bk.  xiii.,  ch.  5.  Gregorovius.  Guizot, 
Hist,  of  Fr.,  ch.  16,  17.  Hist,  of  Civ.  Hase,  sec. 
183,  187,  190.  Hore,  ch.  14.  Hurst,  i.,  ch.  43. 
Knight,  ch.  13-16.  Kurtz,  ii.,  14-20.  Milman, 
bk.  vii.,ch.  6;bk.  ix.,ch.  7;bk.  x.,ch.  3.  Moeller, 
ii.,  245,  248.  Mosheim,  bk.  iii.,  pt.  1,  ch.  2 
(nth  cent.);  bk.  iii.,  pt.  1,  ch.  1  (12th  cent.); 
bk.  iii.,  pt.  1,  ch.  1  (13th  cent.).  Neander,  iv., 
51,  59,  103,  123-128,  152.  Robertson,  iv., 
47,  !94,  38°-  385,  412;  v.,  132,  211,  241;  vi., 
59,  81.  Robinson,  ch.  15.  Tout,  Emp.  and 
Papacy,  ch.  7,  8,  13,  15,  19. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

RISE   OF   THE    MENDICANT   ORDERS   IN   THE   CHURCH 

Outline:  I. — Monasticism  before  the  Crusades.  II. — Effect  of 
the  Crusades  on  monasticism.  III. — Origin  of  the  begging  orders. 
IV. — Rise  and  influence  of  the  Dominicans.  V. — Origin  and 
power  of  the  Franciscans.  VI. — Wide-spread  results  of  mediaeval 
monasticism.     VII. — Sources. 

THE  rise  of  monasticism 1  and.  the  monastic  refor- 
mation2 have  already  been  considered.  The 
spirit  of  the  Clugniac  and  Hildebrandine  re- 
formation was  projected  into  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth 
centuries  through  new  monastic  orders. 

i.  The  order  of  Grammont,  founded  by  Stephen  of 
Tigcrno  in  1073  with  the  sanction  of  Gregory  VII., 
spread  rapidly  over  France  as  a  reform  society.  The 
order  lived  under  an  oral  rule  until  11 43,  when  it 
was  written  out  by  Stephen  of  Lisiac.  Revised  under 
Innocent  III.,  the  rule  lasted  until  the  seventeenth 
century.  The  order  included  more  lay  than  spiritual 
brethren,  also  had  three  women's  cloisters,  and  was 
generally  recognised  as  a  reform  organisation.3 

2.  The  Carthusians,  founded  at  Chartreuse  near 
Grenoble  in  1084  by  Bruno  of  Cologne,  were  peculiarly 
ascetic.  They  still  boast  that  their  order  is  the  only 
one  never  reformed. 

«  See  Ch.  XI. 
*  See  Ch.  XVIII. 
3  Migne,  vol.  204,  pp.  1005-1046. 

5Jo 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    511 


3 .  The  order  of  Fontevraud,  founded  for  both  monks 
and  nuns  in  1093  by  Robert  of  Arbrissel  in  Poitou, 
sent  its  members  through  the  country  preaching  pen- 

■v.ance  and  practising  rigidly  ascetic  lives. 

4.  The  Cistercians,  founded  at  Citeaux  near  Dijon  in 
Burgundy  in  1098  by  Robert  of  Molesme,  a  Benedictine 
abbot,  who,  despairing  of  reforming  the  loose  and 
frivolous  life  of  the  old  order,  resolved  to  found  a  new 
one  for  the  purpose  of  leading  a  life  of  austere  asceti- 
cism. The  order  spread  rapidly  and  reached  its 
culmination  in  the  thirteenth  century,  when  its  cloisters 
numbered  eight  hundred.  l  In  opposition  to  the 
wealthy  monasteries  about  them,  the  Cistercians  had 
unpretentious  buildings,  simple  furniture,  plain  cloth- 
ing, no  pictures,  images,  or  decorations,  and  a  brief, 
unpretentious  ritual.  The  greatest  man  in  the  order 
was  St.  Bernard2  and  under  his  leadership  heretics 
like  Abelard,  Arnold  of  Brescia,  and  the  Cathari 
were  crushed,  and  the  Second  Crusade  was  preached.  3 

5.  The  order  of  Premontre  founded  by  St.  Norbert 
in  1 121 — the  only  German  originator  of  a  monastic 
order  after  Bruno  and  who  was  converted  from  a  rich 
worldly  canon  to  a  pious  monk, — combined  the  life  of 
monk  and  canon,  soon  spread  through  all  countries, 
and  had  at  one  time  a  thousand  abbeys  for  males  and 
rive  hundred  for  females.  The  rules  were  those  of 
Augustine,  the  religious  practices  were  as  severe, 
flesh  was  altogether  forbidden  as  food,  and  fasts  and 
scourgings  were  frequent.  Norbert  dressed  himself 
in   plain   sheep   skins   and   walked   about   barefooted 

1  Milman,  Lot.  Christ.,  bk.  viii.,  ch.  4. 

2  Mabillon,  Life  and  Letters,  2  vols.;  Ogg,  §43,  44 

3  Storrs,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux;  Bales,  St.  Bernard;  Eales,  The 
Works  of  St.  Bernard,  4  vols.     See  Chap.  XX. 


512     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


among  the  poor  people  preaching  and  teaching.  In 
1 1 26  he  was  appointed  Archbishop  of  Magdeburg, 
where  he  carried  on  the  reforms  so  dear  to  his  heart. 

6.  The  Gilbertines,  an  order  originated  in  11 48 
by  Gilbert,  an  English  ecclesiastic  of  noble  origin,  and 
intended  at  first  for  women  only  but  later  opened  to 
men,  planted  many  cloisters  throughout  England  with 
poorhouses,  hospitals,  and  orphanages  attached.1 

7.  The  Celestines,  founded  by  Pope  Celestine  V.  in 
1294,  spread  over  Italy,  France,  and  the  Netherlands. 

8.  The  Humiliati,  founded  by  John  Oldratus,  a 
nobleman  of  Milan  (died  n 59),  included  men  and 
women  in  the  same  house.  This  order  was  the  out- 
growth of  the  pietistic-socialistic  movement  in  north- 
ern Italy  and  was  a  pronounced  forerunner  of  the 
begging  orders. 

9.  The  Serviten,  founded  in  1233  at  Florence 
by  seven  devotees  who  consecrated  themselves  to  the 
Virgin  Mary,  spread  to  France,  the  Netherlands,  and 
Germany  and  in  1424  was  given  the  privileges  of  a 
begging  order. 

The  Crusades  produced  two  new  forms  of  monasticism 
— the  military  orders  and  the  convents  of  women  es- 
tablished on  the  basis  of  useful  activity  and  not  idle 
contemplation.  The  military  orders  were  a  peculiar 
union  of  monk  and  knight  whose  purpose  was,  through 
charity  and  war,  to  protect  pilgrims  to  the  Holy 
Land,  to  care  for  the  sick  and  to  feed  and  house  the 
tired  and  hungry. 

1.  The  order  of  St.  John  had  its  origin  in  a  hospital 
founded  in  1065  at  Jerusalem  for  sick  pilgrims  of  both 
sexes  by  Maurus,  a  rich  man  of  Amalfi.  A  master  and 
lay  brethren  conducted  it.     In  1099,  after  the  victory  of 

«  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biog. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    513 


the  First  Crusade,  many  knights  joined  it,  hence  to  the 
hospital  duties  was  now  added  armed  protection  for 
pilgrims.  Soon  a  new  and  larger  hospital  was  built 
near  the  church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  from  which  the 
order  was  named.  In  1121  Raymond  de  Puy  gave 
the  brotherhood  a  fixed  rule  which  required  the  vows 
of  monasticism,  ascetic  practices,  and  the  duty  of 
armed  protection.1  The  order  had  two  thousand 
members  by  11 60  and  had  received  great  wealth 
from  Popes,  princes,  and  private  persons.  Soon  many 
affiliated  branches  were  planted  on  land  and  on  islands 
of  the  sea.  In  the  thirteenth  century  the  total  income 
of  the  order  was  eighteen  times  as  great  as  that  of  the 
King  of  France.  After  1187  the  order  withdrew  to 
Ptolemais  and  kept  up  the  contest  with  the  Saracens 
for  a  century  when  in  1 291  it  again  withdrew  first  to  the 
Isle  of  Cyprus,  then  in  1309  to  the  Isle  of  Rhodes,  and, 
finally,  in  1350  to  the  Isle  of  Malta  where  it  remained 
until  disbanded  in  1797  by  Napoleon. 

2.  Two  companions  of  Godfrey  of  Bouillon  in.  11 18 
united  with  seven  other  knights  to  protect  and  guide 
pilgrims  to  the  Holy  Land.  To  the  three  monastic 
vows  which  they  took  was  added  a  fourth,  namely, 
to  fight  the  "infidels."  King  Baldwin  II.  gave  them  a 
residence  in  the  Temple  of  Solomon,  hence  the  order 
came  to  be  called  the  Templars.2  The  membership 
soon  increased  and  a  rule  was  drawn  up.  St.  Bernard 
championed  the  order  and  Pope  Honorius  II.  favoured 
it.  Burghers  soon  joined  the  knights,  but  the  hospital 
duties  were  obscured  by  the  feats  of  arms.  They 
withdrew  in  1291  to  Cypress  and  then  to  France  where 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  266.  Privileges  granted  by  Anas- 
tasius  IV.  in  11 54. 

*  Thatcher  and  McNeal.  No,  265a. 


514    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

through  royal  and  papal  favours  they  soon  numbered 
twenty  thousand  knights  and  possessed  vast  wealth. 
Under  Philip  IV.  of  France  they  were  disbanded  and 
robbed  in  1307. 

3.  The  Teutonic  Knights  date  from  the  Third 
Crusade  and  derived  their  name  from  a  German 
hospital  founded  in  11 28  at  Jerusalem,  which  fell  in  11 87. 
The  intense  sufferings  at  the  siege  of  Acre  in  11 90 
led  some  of  the  German  merchants  to  revive  the  work 
of  the  hospital  by  making  tents  out  of  the  sails  of  their 
ships  and  caring  for  the  sick.  In  1200  these  hospital 
attendants  organised  themselves  as  a  military  order, 
adopted  monastic  vows,  promised  to  help  the  sick  and 
wounded,  bound  themselves  to  fight  the  Mohammedans 
and  pagans,  and  were  soon  favoured  by  the  Pope  and 
Emperor.  At  first  the  members  were  all  Germans  of 
honourable  birth  but  later  priests  and  burghers  were 
admitted.  The  order  became  powerful  and  wealthy 
and  in  1237  absorbed  the  order  of  Brothers  of  the 
Sword.  The  order  removed  first  to  Venice  in  1291, 
and  then  to  Marienburg  in  1309  to  wage  a  crusade 
against  the  pagan  Prussians.  Napoleon  in  1809 
suppressed  the  order.  In  Spain  to  fight  the  Moors 
were  organised  the  order  of  Calatrava,  the  order  of 
Aleontera,  and  the  order  of  Montesta.  In  Portugal 
appeared  the  order  of  Christ  and  the  order  of  Avis. 

The  hospital  orders  without  military  service  arose 
in  the  West  and  were  brotherhoods  of  common  people 
patterned  after  the  order  of  St.  John  and  patronised  by 
Popes : 

1.  The  order  of  Cross  Bearers  arose  in  11 60  at 
Bologna  and  in  1238  in  Bohemia. 

2.  The  order  of  Anthony  was  endowed  by  a  French 
noble  and  authorised  by  Urban  II.  in  1095  at  Clermont. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    515 


3.  The  order  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  founded  at 
Montpellier  in  1 1 70  ana  regularly  organised  by  Innocent 
III.  in  11 98. 

4.  The  order  of  St.  Lazarus  probably  began  in  the 
Holy  Land  and  in  the  twelfth  century  spread  over  the 
West. 

5.  The  order  of  the  Trinity  was  created  by  a  priest 
and  a  hermit  and  chartered  in  11 98  by  Innocent  III. 

6.  The  order  of  Knights  of  Emancipation  was 
formed  in  1228  to  free  Christian  slaves. 

7.  The  Bridge  Brothers  were  pledged  to  build  and 
protect  bridges  for  pilgrims  as  well  as  to  care  for  the 
sick. 

8.  Various  associations  of  women  were  attached  to 
both  classes  of  orders  to  serve  in  poorhouses  and 
hospitals  as  nurses  and  assistants  of  all  kinds^___^_^. 

This  rapid  multiplication  of  orders  and  their  marvel- 
lous increase  of  wealth  was  followed  by  equally  rapid 
degeneration  and  decay,  so  that  the  original  purpose 
of  the  monastic  organisation  was  lost  after  a  few 
generations.  The  Popes  granted  them  many  exemp- 
tions. The  members  of  these  various  orders  became 
more  estranged  from  the  humbler  classes  and  were  in 
consequence  unpopular,  suspected,  and  hated.  The 
vows  of  poverty  were  eluded;  the  narrow  cell  became 
a  grand  cloister;  the  deserts  became  parks,  and  the 
hermits,  princely  abbots;  and  the  inmates  of  the 
monastery  changed  into  a  worldly  aristocracy  under 
a  religious  name.  The  promise,  of  chastity  was  for- 
gotten, the  abbeys  became  centres  of  corruption  and 
the  nunneries  almost  houses  of  prostitution. l  Monasti- 
cism  resembled  feudalism  in  which  the  abbot  and  his 
monks    lived    riotously    and   waged    war   upon   their 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  Sacer.  Celib. 


516     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


ghbours.  Such  men  as  Gilbert,  the  Abbot  of 
Gemblours,  confessed  with  shame  that  monachism 
had  become  an  oppression  and  a  scandal — a  hissing 
and  a  reproach  to  all  men. 1  St.  Bernard  said  in  1147 
of  the  region  of  the  Count  of  Toulouse : 

The  churches  are  without  people,  the  people  are  without 
priests,  the  priests  without  the  reverence  due  them,  and  the 
Christians  without  Christ.  The  churches  are  regarded  as 
synagogues,  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord  is  no  longer  holy; 
the  sacraments  are  no  longer  held  sacred;  feast  days  are 
without  solemnity ;  men  die  in  their  sins  and  their  souls  are 
hurried  to  the  dread  tribunal,  neither  reconciled  by  penance 
nor  fortified  by  the  holy  communion.2 

Furthermore  the  state  and  the  nobility  stepped  in  and 
attempted  to  control  the  monastic  system  and  par- 
ticularly the  appointment  of  abbots. 3  The  obligation 
of  obedience  to  superior  authority  seemed  to  be  utterly 
disregarded. 

The  old  form  of  monasticism,  at  its  best,  thought 
only  of  the  salvation  of  its  own  members  and  not  of 
the  world.  Here,  then,  was  an  opportunity  for  a 
great  revolution  and  also  a  crying  need  for  it.  Every- 
where monasteries  were  rapidly  obtaining  exemptions 
from  the  bishops  and  subjecting  themselves  to  the 
successor  of  St.  Peter.  While  this  strengthened  the 
Pope,  it  stimulated  conventual  degeneracy,  relaxed  mon- 
astic discipline,  denationalised  monasticism,  aroused 
popular  hostility,  and  spread  the  report  that  a  little  gold 
would  purchase  any  privilege. 4  Under  these  conditions 
it  was  perhaps  natural  that  the  inmates  of  monasteries 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  39,  53,  54. 

2  Ibid.,  i.,  70. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  267. 

4  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  35. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    517 


were  frequently  recruited  from  the  worst  and  most 
vicious  classes.  Such  motives  as  sickness,  poverty, 
crime,  mortal  danger,  dread  of  hell,  and  desire  of 
heaven  would  not  furnish  the  best  class  of  devotees.1 
In  one  French  cloister  the  inmates  were  all  professional 
highway  robbers.  Furthermore,  the  name  monk  was 
rendered  still  more  despicable  by  the  crowds  of  tramps 
palming  themselves  off  as  monks.  Bearded,  tonsured, 
and  dressed  in  the  religious  habit,  they  swarmed 
throughout  all  parts  of  Christendom,  begging,  stealing, 
deceiving,  and  peddling  false  relics,  and  were  often 
taken  in  crime  and  slain  without  mercy. 2  The  secular 
priests  hated  the  monks  and  the  people  mistrusted  and 
despised  both.3  The  intense  speculative  spirit  of  the 
age  tended  to  create  disbelief  in  the  Church  and  to 
produce  new  sects  which  the  Papacy  tried  in  vain  to 
suppress  by  force.  The  secular  clergy  were  also  in  bad 
condition — the  upper  clergy  wealthy,  powerful,  im- 
moral, and  worldly;  the  lower  clergy  characterised 
by  sloth  and  incapacity.  The  need  of  reformation 
was  generally  recognised,  but  who  would  do  it?  "The 
Church  had  made  no  real  effort  at  internal  reform;  it 
was  still  grasping,  licentious,  covetous,  and  a  strange 
desire  for  something — they  knew  not  exactly  what — 
began  to  take  possession  of  men's  hearts  and  spread 
like  an  epidemic  from  village  to  village  and  from  land 
to  land."4  Heresy,  likewise,  was  making  rapid  strides 
and  was  propagated  by  sects  whose  austere  lives  and 
serviceable  conduct  were  popular  because  in  such  a 
striking  contrast  to  those  of  the  monks  and  clergy. 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  36,  37. 

2  Ibid.,  I,  37,  38. 

3  Ibid.,  i.,  34. 

4  Ibid.,  i.,  268. 


518     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  general  purpose  of  the  begging  orders,  which 
grew  out  of  these  conditions,  was  (i)  to  reform  the 
Church  from  within  and  not  by  revolution ;  (2)  to  avoid 
the  evils  and  corruptions  of  wealth  by  making  poverty 
an  object  of  admiration  and  sanctincation ;  (3)  to  send 
their  members  out  to  save  the  Church  and  the  world 
instead  of  shutting  them  up  in  monasteries  for  the 
selfish  purpose  of  saving  their  own  souls;  (4)  to  su- 
pervise the  whole  system  and  to  keep  the  order  in  a 
harmonious  working  condition  by  a  rigidly  organised 
monarchial  government;  and  (5)  to  set  on  foot  a  great 
reformatory  home  movement  which  would  win  the 
Church  away  from  the  corrupting  idols  back  to  a  purer 
and  more  primitive  Christianity. 1  The  two  prominent 
begging  orders  were  both  Romanic  in  origin  and  not 
Germanic. 

The  way  for  the  begging  orders  was  partially  prepared 
by  antecedent  reformers  and  orders.  Conspicuous 
among  the  individuals  who  were  forerunners  of  St. 
Francis  and  St.  Dominic  was  (1)  St.  Bernard  (1091- 
11 53)  who  advocated  poverty  and  denounced  the 
abuses  of  his  day.  (2)  Arnold  of  Brescia  {c.  1100- 
1155),  a  priest  and  follower  of  Abelard,  assailed  the 
Pope's  temporal  power,  attacked  the  wealth  of  the 
clergy,  urged  the  secularisation  of  ecclesiastical  property, 
and  led  a  popular  revolt  in  Rome  for  a  republic.  He 
was  hanged,  burned,  and  his  ashes  were  thrown  into  the 
Tiber.2  (3)  Gerach  of  Reichersberg  (1093-1169).  a 
German  monk  and  canon  of  Augsburg,  left  his  position 
disgusted  at  the  irregularity  of  the  lives  of  the  canons, 
went  to  Rome  in  11 25,  and  was  officially  appointed 

1  Sabatier,  28  ff. 

2  Mon.Ger.,  xx.,  537;  Jaffd,  i.,  404;  Hausrath,  Arnold  of  Brescia; 
Franke,  Arnold  of  Brescia;  Gregorovius,  Rome  in  M.  A. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    519 


by  Honorius  II.  to  reform  the  canonry.  As  the 
head  of  the  canonry  of  Reichersberg  (n 3  2)  he  became 
an  active  and  rigorous  reformer.1  (4)  Foulques  de 
Neuilly  (died  1202),  an  obscure,  ignorant  priest,  whose 
mighty  conviction  of  the  sins  of  the  world  and  the 
Church  made  him  a  great  preacher,  was  licensed  by 
Innocent  111.  as  a  missionary.  He  converted  thousands 
from  wayward  lives,  reclaimed  lost  women  and  founded 
a  convent  for  them  at  Paris,  denounced  the  clergy 
without  mercy,  and  struck  at  every  evil  in  the  Church. 
His  reformation,  however,  was  lost  in  the  crusading  zeal 
and  he  himself  helped  to  preach  the  Fourth  Crusade. 2 
Among  the  movements  laying  the  foundations  for  the 
begging  orders  were  (1)  the  "Poor  Men,"  or  Arnold ists, 
who  were  founded  in  Italy  after  the  death  of  Arnold  of 
Brescia3;  (2)  the  "Poor  Men  of  Lyons"4;  and  (3)  the 
"Poor  Catholics,"  who  were  founded  by  Duran  de 
Husce,  a  Spaniard  and  disciple  of  St.  Dominic.  These 
"Poor  Catholics"  based  their  organisation  on  poverty 
and  self-abnegation,  sought  to  convert  heretics,  and 
were  approved  by  Innocent  III.  although  fought  by 
the  clergy.  They  appear  to  have  been  lost  in  the 
forcible  effort  to  exterminate  heresy. 5  (4)  The  Beg- 
hards  and  Begums  were  founded  in  the  Netherlands 
about  1 180.  At  first  companies  of  women  were  formed 
in  the  Belgian  cities  to  care  for  the  sick,  to  perform 
other  acts  of  charity,  and  to  aid'  the  widows  and 
orphans  of  the  Crusaders.  They  lived  together  in  a 
common  house,  led  a  pious  life  according  to  a  few 

1  Migne,   193,   194;  Mon.   Ger.,  iii.,    131-525;    Wattenbach,  Ge- 
schichtsquellen.  ii.,  308,  520. 

2  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  244. 

3  Ibid.,  i.,  75. 

4  See  Chap.  XVIII. 

s  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  246. 


520     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


simple  rules,  but  took  no  vows.  They  were  called 
Beguins.  Early  in  the  thirteenth  century  similar  com- 
panies of  men  were  formed  and  called  Beghards. 
Members  could  leave  the  order  at  will,  marry  or  enter 
any  occupation  after  leaving.  These  orders  had  their 
own  little  houses,  each  one  distinct  in  its  organisation, 
which  were  frequently  endowed  by  rich  burghers.  The 
inmates  were  also  given  to  hand  labour  and  did  not 
neglect  education,  although  their  chief  work  was  soul 
saving  and  charity.  They  spread  rapidly  from  the 
Netherlands  to  Germany,  to  France,  to  Italy,  and  to 
Bohemia  and  Poland.  As  these  associations  increased, 
their  members  began  to  wander  through  the  countries, 
begging  and  performing  acts  of  mercy.  After  the  mid- 
dle of  the  thirteenth  century,  charges  of  heresy  were 
made  against  them  and  they  were  persecuted  by  the 
Church. 1  (5)  The  Carmelites,  one  of  the  mendicant  or- 
ders, according  to  its  legendary  history  was  founded 
by  Elijah  on  Mount  Carmel.  The  first  disciples  were 
Jonah,  Micah,  and  Obadiah;  and  the  wife  of  Obadiah 
was  the  first  abbess.  Even  Pythagoras,  Mary,  and 
Jesus  were  considered  members.  The  real  origin,  how- 
ever, seems  to  lie  in  the  fact  that  Phocas,  a  Greek  monk 
from  Patmos,  in  1185  saw  the  ruins  of  a  monastery  on 
Mount  Carmel  and  there  an  association  of  hermits  was 
formed.  The  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem  in  1209  gave  the 
association  a  rule  and  in  1224  this  rule  was  confirmed 
by  Honorius  III.  The  order  played  an  active  part 
during  the  Crusades  until  1238,  when  it  was  removed 
to  Sicily  and  later  to  England  and  France,  where  it 
followed  the  custom  and  became  a  mendicant  order  in 
1247. 

1  Mosheim,    The  Beghards  and  Beguins.     In    131 1    Clement  V. 
suppressed  both  orders. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    521 


The  founder  of  the  Dominicans,  or  Black  Friars, 
was  Dominic  de  Guzman,  born  in  11 70  in  old  Cas- 
tile" of  noble  ancestry.  Many  miraculous  tales  were 
told  about  his  mother  and  his  infancy. 1  At  the  age 
of  seven  he  was  given  over  to  his  uncle,  who  was 
archpresbyter  at  Gumyel  de  Yean.  At  the  age  of 
fourteen  he  entered  the  University  of  Palencia, 2  where 
he  remained  ten  years  as  a  "laborious,  devout,  abstem- 
ious" student.  Theology  was  his  chief  subject  and  he 
became  a  distinguished  theologian.  While  a  student, 
it  was  said  that  he  sold  his  clothes  to  feed  the  poor  in 
a  time  of  famine,  and  on  another  occasion  he  offered  to 
redeem  a  sad  woman's  brother  from  slavery  by  taking 
his  place.  At  the  age  of  twenty-four  (1194).  after 
having  studied  ten  years  at  the  University,  he  became 
a  canon  of  the  Bishop  of  Osma,  where  he  helped  to 
introduce  the  rules  of  St.  Augustine.  Soon  he  was 
made  sub-prior  of  the  chapter,  became  very  active  in  ec- 
clesiastical affairs,  excelled  in  asceticism,  which  was 
inspired  no  doubt  by  reading  Cassian's  famous  work 
on  monasticism,  and  became  a  zealous  and  eloquent 
missionary  among  the  Mohammedans  and  Jews  of  the 
neighbourhood. 

In  1203  he  went  with  the  Bishop  of  Osma  to  southern 
France  to  secure  a  bride  for  the  King's  son.  In 
this  diplomatic  venture  they  were  successful,  but  the 
bride  died  before  she  could  go  to  Spain.  Here  it  was 
that  Dominic  got  his  first  view  of  the  aggressive 
Albigensian    heretics.  3     From    southern     France    he 

i  Milman,  Lot.  Christ.,  bk.  ix.,  250.  See  Drane,  Hist,  of  St. 
Dominic,  Lond.,  1891,  who  narrates  all  these  legends  as  true. 

2  Afterwards  transferred  to  Salamanca. 

3  It  is  related  that  at  Toulouse,  Dominic's  host  was  an  Albigensian 
and  that  the  young  religious  enthusiast  spent  the  night  in  converting 
him. 


522     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


accompanied  the  Bishop  of  Osma  to  Rome,  where  the 
bishop  begged  Innocent  III.  to  permit  him  to  go 
as  a  missionary  to  the  Huns,  or  the  Saracens,  but  the 
request  was  refused.  The  task  of  converting  the 
heretics  of  southern  France  had  been  intrusted  to 
the  Cistercians,  but  they  had  utterly  failed  to  accom- 
plish it.  As  Dominic  and  the  bishop  were  return- 
ing to  France,  they  met  at  Montpellier  three  of  these 
Cistercian  abbots,  who  had  been  sent  out  by  the  Pope 
to  superintend  the  duties  intrusted  to  their  order. 
The  pomp  and  splendour  of  the  abbots  called  forth 
this  bold  rebuke  from  Dominic:  "It  is  not  by  the 
display  of  pomp  and  power,  cavalcades  of  retainers  and 
richly  houseled  palfreys,  nor  by  gorgeous  apparel,  that 
the  heretics  win  proselytes ;  it  is  by  zealous  preaching, 
by  apostolic  humility,  by  austerity  and  seeming  holi- 
ness. Zeal  must  be  met  by  zeal,  humility  by  humility, 
false  sanctity  by  real  sanctity,  preaching  falsehood 
by  preaching  truth."1  The  abbots  were  advised  to 
send  out  for  the  great  work  men  who  were  imbued  with 
apostolic  poverty  and  zeal.  The  abbots  accepted 
the  advice  and  joined  Dominic  and  his  companion  in 
their  new  conception  of  missionary  work,  but  appar- 
ently their  labours  were  checked  in  1 208  by  the  crusade 
waged  against  the  Albigenses. 

During  the  efforts  to  exterminate  these  revolters 
against  the  faith  and  authority  of  Rome,  there  are 
two  accounts  of  the  activity  of  Dominic, — first,  that 
that  he  was  a  fiery  leader  of  the  crusading  parties,  and, 
secondly,  that  he  strongly  denounced  the  war.  The 
probability  seems  to  be  that  he  lived  quietly  in  his 
monastery  at   Prouille  endeavouring  to   convert  the 

1  Milman,  hat.  Christ.,  bk.  ix.,  242. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    523 


heretics  without  taking  part  in  the  war. *  Whatever 
the  fact  may  have  been  however,  so  far  as  the  historical 
sources  go,  for  the  next  eight  years  his  life  is  a  blank. 
No  doubt  he  was  wisely  planning  for  the  future.  In 
1206  the  Bishop  of  Toulouse  presented  "to  Dominic 
of  Osma  the  church  of  St.  Mary's  of  Prouille  and  the 
adjacent  land  to  the  extent  of  thirty  feet"  for  the  use 
of  his  women  converts,  who  at  first  were  nine  noble 
ladies  for  whom  he  drew  up  a  monastic  rule.  The 
convent  soon  became  wealthy  and  influential.  At 
the  close  of  the  war  in  1214  Dominic,  now  forty-four 
years  old,  had  made  but  little  progress.  His  converts 
were  few,  his  influence  small,  but  the  seeds  were 
being  sowed  which  would  return  a  rich  harvest.  His 
character  at  this  time  reveals  a  man  of  earnest,  resolute 
purpose;  of  deep,  unalterable  conviction;  full  of 
burning  faith;  kind  of  heart  and  ever  cheerful;  of 
winning  manner  and  charitable  beyond  reason;  yet 
given  to  scourgings  and  vigils  till  nature  was  nearly 
exhausted. 2 

Through  the  gift  of  Peter  Cella,  a  rich  man  of  Tou- 
louse, Dominic  founded  in  12 14  the  monastery  of 
St.  Rouen  near  Toulouse  which  was  the  home  of  the 
Inquisition  for  over  a  hundred  years.  There  he  gathered 
some  devout  souls  about  him  and  they  began  to  live 
like  monks.  The  Bishop  of  Toulouse  gave  them 
one  sixth  of  the  tithes  for  their  work.  This  was  the 
beginning  of  the  great  Dominican  order.  The  next 
step  was  to  get  papal  sanction  for  the  new  organisation 
and  for  this  purpose  Dominic  went  with  the  Bishop 
of  Toulouse  to  Rome.     Innocent  III.,  won  through  a 

1  The  Inquisition  was  not  organised  until  121 5.     See  Drane,  109; 
Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  300. 
1  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  250. 


524     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


dream, 1  consented  to  sanction  the  order  provided  some 
known  rule  should  be  adopted.  Consequently  Dominic 
organised  his  monks  according  to  the  canons  regular 
of  St.  Augustine,  which  was  Dominic's  own  order. 
That  rule,  however,  was  almost  immediately  modified 
to  meet  the  boundless  plans  and  scope  of  the  work 
which  held  Dominic  captive.  A  grand  master  was  put 
at  the  head  of  the  order  as  absolute  ruler  and  under  him 
were  provincial  priors,  elected  during  good  behaviour. 
The  friars  were  held  to  implicit  obedience,  as  soldiers 
of  Christ,  but  poverty  was  not  at  first  a  part  of  the 
rule.  It  was  adopted  only  after  the  Franciscans 
had  made  it  so  attractive  (1220).  At  stated  times 
general  and  provincial  assemblies  were  to  be  held 
to  further  the  prosperity  of  the  order. 

Dominic  now  wisely  took  up  his  residence  at  Rome, 
where  he  was  made  court  preacher,  lived  in  the  papal 
palace,  and  guided  the  activities  of  his  new  order. 
Honorius  III.  in  12 16  sanctioned  the  needed  changes 
in  the  rule,  authorised  the  monks  to  preach  and  hear 
confessions  everywhere,  and  took  the  order  under  his 
special  protection. 2  Dominic's  little  band  of  sixteen  fol- 
lowers— among  whom  were  an  Englishman,  a  German, 
and  some  Spaniards — were  sent  out  into  the  world 
to  begin  the  strenuous  life  of  service.  Laymen  and 
ecclesiastics  of  all  ranks  hastened  to  join  the  order. 
When  the  second  general  assembly  was  held  at  Bologna 
in  1 221  there  were  present  representatives  from 
sixty  convents  and  eight  provinces,  representing 
Spain,  France,  England,  Hungary,  Poland,  and  Italy. 
This  same  year  a  secular  organisation  for  both  men  and 

'  In  the  dream  the  Pope  saw  the  great  Roman  Church  about  to 
fall  had  not  Dominic  upheld  it. 

2  Conway,  Frachet's  Lives  of  the  Brethren. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    525 


women  called  "The  Soldiers  of  Jesus  Christ"  was  or- 
ganised to  convert  the  laymen,  to  fight  heretics,  and 
to  win  unbelievers.  The  members  had  a  distinct 
dress  and  special  rites  and  services. *  Dominic  died 
in  a  monastery  at  Bologna  in  1221  and  twelve  years 
later  was  canonised. 

A  new  constitution  was  adopted  by  the  Dominicans  in 
1228  and  revised  and  completed  in  1241  and  1252. 
Members  of  the  order  devoted  themselves  exclusively 
to  preaching,  soul  saving,  fighting  heresy,  and  in 
educating  the  people  in  the  true  faith.  From  the 
schools  founded  by  the  order  came  most  of  their  re- 
cruits. They  were  the  model  preachers  of  the  Middle 
Ages  and  the  keenest  theologians  of  the  day,  producing 
such  men  as  Peter  Lombard  and  Thomas  Aquinas. 
Among  their  numbers  were  found  popes,  cardinals, 
and  famous  doctors.  The  first  Dominican  to  wear  the 
papal  tiara  was  Innocent  V.  in  1276,  and  he  was  suc- 
ceeded by  three  others.  The  first  cardinal  to  be  chosen 
from  their  ranks  was  Hugh  of  Vienne  in  1243,  and  he 
was  followed  by  fifty-nine  more.  Among  the  famous 
doctors  of  the  order  were  Albertus  Magnus,  Meister 
Echart,  Johan  Tauler,  Iienry  Sufo,  Savonarola,  Las 
Casas,  and  Vincent  Ferrier.  The  Dominicans  could  boast 
of  more  than  eight  hundred  bishops,  one  hundred  and 
fifty  archbishops,  and  the  number  of  martyrs  belonging 
to  their  order  between  1234  and  1334  was  thirteen 
thousand  three  hundred  and  seventy.  So  influential 
did  they  become  and  so  dangerous  to  the  prerogatives 
of  the  clergy2  that  Innocent  IV.  (1254),  Boniface  VIII. 

1  The  "Soldiers  of  Jesus  Christ"  later  became  the  "Order  of 
Penance"  and  is  now  known  as  "The  Third  Order."  There  are 
many  editions  in  English  of  the  Tertiary  Daily  Manual. 

2  Moeller,  ii.,  412  ff. 


526     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


(1300),  and  Clement  VIII.  (1311)  were  forced  to 
curtail  their  privileges.  In  1228  the  first  Dominican 
monk  occupied  a  chair  in  the  Univeristy  of  Paris  and 
in  1230  another  was  added  and  from  this  time  on  they 
attempted  to  monopolise  learning  in  the  University. 
Scholasticism  was  largely  the  product  of  their  minds. 
They  were  very  active  in  missionary  work  and  in  1245 
they  were  sent  to  the  Tartars  by  Innocent  IV. ;  in  1249 
to  Persia  by  Louis  IX. ;  in  1272  to  China  by  Gregory  X. ; 
and  they  laboured  among  the  Jews  and  Saracens  in 
Spain,  and  in  Poland,  Denmark,  Sweden,  and  Russia. 
They  built  monasteries  and  churches;  and  art  and 
architecture  are  deeply  indebted  to  them  for  many 
of  the  finest  specimens  produced  in  Europe. x  The 
history  of  theology,  philosophy,  and  science  until  the 
Renaissance  and  Reformation  is  little  more  than  a 
petty  controversial  rivalry  between  them  and  the 
Franciscans. 

The  founder  of  the  Franciscans,  or  Minorites,  or 
Grey  Friars,  was  Francis  of  Assisi.  He  was  born 
in  1 182  at  Assisi  of  a  rich  mercantile  family.  He 
received  a  little  learning  from  the  parish  priest,  but 
manifested  no  love  for  school  instruction.  He  knew 
Latin  and  learned  some  French  while  with  his  father  on 
business  in  France.  It  was  early  determined  that  he 
should  be  educated  for  business.  Reports  concerning 
his  early  character  show  that  he  was  cheerful  and  kind- 
hearted,  careless  and  indifferent  to  work,  vain  and 
fond  of  fine  clothes,  prone  to  join  comrades  in  dissipa- 
ting carousals,  and  too  fond  of  squandering  his  father's 
money  in  banquets  for  his  friends. 2 

1  Jameson,  Legends  of  Monastic  Orders  as  Represented  in  the  Fine 
Arts. 

2  Sabatier,  8. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    527 


At  the  age  of  twenty  Francis  joined  a  war  party 
against  Perugia.  He  was  taken  captive  and  held 
for  a  year  in  prison  and  this  seemed  to  sober  him 
somewhat.  Two  serious  illnesses  led  him  to  change 
his  life  and  a  series  of  visions  determined  his  conduct 
(1208).  He  boldly  and  suddenly  deserted  his  worldly 
companions  and  started  out  passionately  on  the  path 
of  self-denial.  He  was  now  twenty-six  years  of  age. 
He  declared  that  poverty  should  be  his  bride,  and 
resolved  to  go  to  Rome  to  throw  all  his  possessions  on 
the  altar  of  St.  Peter.  Upon  his  return  journey  he 
joined  a  gang  of  beggars  and  exchanged  his  clothes 
for  the  filthiest  rags  among  them.  Next  he  appro- 
priated a  quantity  of  his  father's  goods  and  sold  them, 
together  with  the  horse,  to  restore  the  church  of 
St.  Damiani.  Then  he  hid  a  month  in  a  cave  and 
when  he  returned  looking  wild  and  haggard  he  was 
hooted  and  stoned  in  the  streets.  His  father,  alarmed 
and  angered  at  his  acts  called  him  before  the  Bishop 
to  force  him  to  give  up  his  patrimony.  Francis 
stripped  off  all  his  clothing  but  his  hair  shirt  and  the 
Bishop  covered  him  with  an  old  cloak.  Surrendering 
his  inheritance  and  even  his  very  clothing  to  his  father 
he  exclaimed:  "Peter  Bernardone  was  my  father; 
I  now  have  but  one  father,  He  that  is  in  heaven." 
This  was  the  keynote  of  his  whole  life.  *  From  now 
henceforth  he  was  consecrated  to  mendicancy,  wandered 
about  in  a  hermit's  attire,  devoted  himself  to  the 
lepers,  helped  restore  with  his  own  hands  four  ruined 
churches,  and  resolved  to  work  out  his  own  salvation 
in  loving  service  for  the  weak  and  needy — an  evidence 
of  his  genuine  conversion  and  a  thing  radically  different 
from  the   Christianity   of  that   period.     One   day   in 

1  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  387. 


528     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


February,  1209,  the  text  rang  in  his  ears:  "Provide 
neither  gold  nor  silver  nor  brass  in  your  purses,  neither 
scrip  for  your  journey,  neither  two  coats  nor  shoes 
nor  staff,  for  the  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire."1 
These  strong  words,  coming  from  the  priest  who  was 
celebrating  mass  in  one  of  the  little  churches  which 
Francis  had  helped  to  rebuild,  pierced  him  like  a 
revelation.  "This  is  what  I  want,"  he  cried;  "this 
is  what  I  was  seeking;  from  this  day  forth  I  shall  set 
myself  with  all  my  strength  to  put  it  in  practice." 
Accordingly  he  threw  away  his  wallet,  staff,  and  shoes, 
and  put  on  a  rough  grey  tunic  of  coarse  woollen  cloth, 
girt  by  a  hempen  cord,  and  went  barefooted  through 
the  land  preaching  repentance.2  He  lived  now  as  a 
follower  of  the  living  Jesus, — "like  the  birds  of  the 
air," — and  his  childish  simplicity  and  radiating  face 
made  him  beloved  by  the  poor  and  a  comfort  to  the 
troubled  and  sick. 3 

Francis  did  not  have  in  mind  at  first  the  institution 
of  a  brotherhood;  his  ideal  was  rather  the  solitary 
ascetic  preaching  repentance  to  a  world  of  sin,  and  his 
strange,  fervoured  piety  soon  made  him  famous  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Assisi.  Gradually  kindred  spirits 
joined  him  and  begged  to  share  his  mission.  Bernard 
of  Quintavalle  was  the  first  to  ask  to  be  associated  with 
him,  and  in  order  to  learn  God's  will  Francis  opened  the 
Bible  at  random  and  read  Matthew  xix.,  21 ;  vi.,  8;  xvi., 
24.  Others  came  until  his  disciples  numbered  eight. 
He  received  them  and  put  them  under  vows  of  poverty 
and  preaching.  The  time  had  now  come  to  evangelise 
the  world.  These  disciples  were  sent  out  in  pairs  to 
the  four  points  of  the  compass,  with  these  words : 

1  Matt,  x.,  7-10.  2  Sabatier,  70. 

3  See  Ogg,  §63. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    529 


Go  and  preach  two  by  two.  Preach  peace  and  patience ; 
tend  the  wounded  and  relieve  the  distressed;  reclaim  the 
erring;  bless  them  which  persecute  you  and  pray  for  them 
that  despitefully  use  you.  Fear  not  because  you  are 
small  and  seem  foolish.  Have  confidence  in  the  Lord  who 
has  vanquished  the  world.  Some  will  receive  you  and 
many  proud  will  resist  you.  Bear  all  with  sweetness  and 
patience.  Soon  the  wise  and  noble  will  be  with  us.  The 
Lord  hath  given  me  to  see  this — I  have  in  my  ears  the 
sounds  of  the  languages  of  all  peoples  who  will  come  to  us — ■ 
French,  Spanish,  German  and  English.  The  Lord  will  make 
us  a  great  people  even  to  the  end  of  the  earth. 

Upon  their  reuniting,  four  more  were  added  to  their 
number  and  Francis  gave  them  a  rule  of  which  poverty 
was  the  basic  principle  and  chastity  and  obedience  were 
necessary  requirements. 

Papal  confirmation  was  the  next  step.  This  Francis 
sought  in  1 2 10  from  Innocent  III.  in  a  friendly  inter- 
view at  Rome. 1  The  Pope  in  doubt  submitted  the 
question  to  the  cardinals  and  it  was  carried  in  favour 
of  Francis.  His  rule  was  approved  orally  and  the  mem- 
bers thus  came  under  the  spiritual  authority  of  Rome 
and  were  authorised  to  receive  the  tonsure  and  to 
preach  the  word  of  God  A  second  rule  less  severe  than 
the  first  was  drawn  up  and  approved  by  Honorius  III. 
in  1223,  and  it  remained  the  unaltered  constitution  of 
the  Franciscan  order.2  The  organisation  according 
to  this  rule  provided  for  a  General  Minister  at  the 
head,  provincial  ministers,  and  brethren,  or  minorities. 
Applicants  were  required  to  sell  all  their  possessions 
for  the  poor,  to  promise  to  live  according  to  the  gospel, 
and  to  take  the  absolute  vows  of  chastity,  obedience, 

1  Matthew  of  Paris,  ed.  by  Watson,  340. 

2  Henderson,  Hist.  Docs.,  344;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  269. 


53°    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  poverty.  Each  monk  was  to  have  two  gowns 
of  vile  cloth  which  were  to  be  patched  as  long  as  possible. 
No  shoes  were  to  be  worn  except  when  absolutely 
necessary.  All  but  the  sick  had  to  walk.  No  money 
could  be  received  save  for  the  poor  and  the  needy. 
All  who  were  able  were  compelled  to  labour  and  thus 
earn  their  food  and  clothing.  "Brethren,"  said  Francis, 
"know  that  poverty  is  the  special  path  of  salvation,  the 
inciter  to  humility,  and  the  root  of  perfection."1  A 
very  simple  ritual  with  one  daily  mass  and  but  little 
music  was  instituted. 

Francis  sent  his  disciples  out  over  the  whole  world 
to  preach  his  gospel,  while  he  continued  the  simplicity 
of  his  earlier  life,  living  in  a  little  hut  with  a  ground 
floor,  preaching  to  and  converting  whole  multitudes 
who  came  to  hear  and  to  see  him,  and  continuing  his 
acts  of  mercy  and  love.  He  founded  a  convent  of 
women  called  the  "Clarisses"  or  "Poor  Clares,"  who 
became  almost  as  famous  as  the  "Poor  Brothers."  2 
In  1221  he  established  the  "Brothers  and  Sisters  of 
Penitence,"  a  lay  order  whose  members,  though 
living  under  a  rule,  retained  their  social  position 
and  employments,  but  bound  themselves  to  abstain 
from  all  worldly  dissipations  like  dancing,  theatre-going, 
and  secular  festivals,  and  to  live  godly  lives. 3  This  was 
a  very  sensible  arrangement  because  by  it  Francis 
enlisted  all  classes  in  sympathetic  co-operation.4 
Impelled  by  missionary  zeal  Francis  journeyed  not 
only  throughout  Italy  but  to  Illyria,  Spain,  and  with 
twelve  brethren  even  went  to  the  distant  Holy  Land, 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  vol.  i.,  264.     See  his  curious  prayer  to  Christ. 

2  Read  the  legend  of  St.  Clara  in  Butler,  Lives  of  Saints. 

3  Milman,  iv.,  270. 

4  Maclear,  Hist,  of  Christ.  Missions  in  the  M.  A.,  ch.  16. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    531 


where  he  not  only  converted  thousands  to  Christian- 
ity, but  even  attempted  to  win  the  Sultan  himself, 
Failing  in  this  he  returned  to  Italy. 1  In  his  relations 
with  Rome  Francis  was  the  truest  son  of  the  Church 
and  formed  an  army  trained  in  piety  and  absolute 
obedience  which  the  Pope  used  later  to  great  advantage. 
For  himself,  however,  he  demanded  freedom  to  live 
and  to  act  after  his  own  heart.  His  life  was  spared 
to  see  his  order  cover  the  world,  but  at  length  worn  out 
by  his  labours  and  consuming  zeal  he  died  in  1226 
naked  and  in  poverty. 2  After  his  death  it  is  said  that 
the  five  wounds  of  the  Saviour,  culled  the  "stigmata," 
were  found  on  his  body.3  He  was  canonised  in  1228 
by  Gregory  IX. 

Few  persons  in  the  world's  history  have  stamped 
their  character  and  influence  upon  their  age  in  a  more 
marked  manner  than  did  St.  Francis.  His  life  is 
hallowed  by  countless  miracles  and  it  is  not  always  easy 
to  separate  myth  from  truth.  But  a  careful  study 
of  his  career  reveals  the  fact  that  he  felt  the  unity  of  the 
universe  in  God  and  preached  it  to  man  in  love  and 
charity  as  a  genuine  religious  philosopher.  With  an 
unparalleled  ardour  and  spiritual  industry,  he  taught 
every  one  that  the  salvation  of  a  human  soul  comes 
through  self-sacrifice.  He  and  his  followers  aimed 
to  realise  the  simplicity  of  Christ  and  his  apostles. 
"No  human  creature  since  Christ  has  more  fully 
incarnated  the  ideal  of  Christianity  than  Francis."4 
His  chief  happiness  was  in  ministering  to  the  needs  of 

>  Milman,  iv.,  267. 

z  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  270;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  392; 
Ogg,  §64,  gives  the  will  of  St.  Francis. 

3  See  Sabatier,  443  ff.,  Hase,  and  other  authorities. 

*  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  I,  260.  See  Jessopp,  The  Coming  of  the 
Friars,  47  ff. 


532     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

his  fellow  creatures.  "The  perfection  of  gladness," 
he  said  "consists  not  in  working  miracles,  in  curing 
the  sick,  expelling  devils,  or  raising  the  dead;  nor  in 
learning  and  knowledge  of  all  things ;  nor  in  eloquence 
to  convert  the  world,  but  in  bearing  all  ills  and  injuries 
and  injustices  and  despiteful  treatment  with  patience  and 
humility. ' '  Through  his  insane,  extravagant  asceticism 
there  shines  forth  a  patience,  humility,  and  depth  of 
love  necessary  to  oppose  the  pride  and  cruelty  of  his 
age.  He  inculcated  the  gospel  of  cheerfulness  and  de- 
clared that  gloom  and  sadness  were  the  deadly  weapons 
of  Satan.  He  had  a  poetic  soul,  was  passionately 
fond  of  animals  and  flowers — called  them  his  brothers 
and  sisters — and  preached  some  beautiful  sermons  to 
the  trees,  the  fish  in  the  streams,  the  birds,  *  and  the 
posies.  He  wrote  some  rugged  and  touching  verse — 
"The  first  broken  utterances  of  a  new  voice  which 
was  soon  to  fill  the  world." 2  "Of  all  saints  St.  Francis 
was  the  most  blameless  and  gentle.  Francis  was  em- 
phatically the  saint  of  the  people,  of  a  poetic  people, 
like  the  Italians."3  In  many  ways  he  was  the  fore- 
runner of  Dante.  In  prayer,  in  picture,  and  in  song, 
the  worship  of  St.  Francis  vied  with  that  of  Jesus.  In 
story  and  legend  he  soon  outstripped  Christ. 

It  was  in  12 19  that  St.  Francis  sent   his  disciples 

;  out   to   evangelise   the   world.     Those   who   went   to 

\   Germany   and    Hungary   were    regarded    as    heretics 

■    and  roughly  treated.     In  France  at  first  they  were 

mistaken   for  Cathari   and   an   appeal   was   made  to 

the  Pope  concerning  them.     Five  suffered  martyrdom 

in   Morocco.     They  soon  spread  to  all  parts   of  the 

1  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  391. 

2  Read  his  "Song  of  Creation"  in  Mrs.  Oliphant's  Biography, 
s  Milman,  iv.,  268,  269. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    533 


world  and  many  of  them  perished  as  martyrs  in  the 
cause  they  had  espoused.  When  St.  Francis  held  his 
first  chapter  in  12  21  three  thousand  members1  were 
present  and  Provincial  Masters  had  been  appointed  in 
all  European  countries.  In  1260  there  were  thirty- 
three  provinces,  one  hundred  eighty-two  guardianships, 
eight  thousand  monasteries  and  two  hundred  thousand 
friars.  The  order  has  produced  five  Popes  and  many 
cardinals,  bishops,  theologians,  writers,  and  poets. 

A  comparison  of  the  two  founders  and  their  orders 
reveals  some  interesting  facts.  Both  leaders  were 
born  about  the  same  time,  St.  Dominic  being  the  older 
by  twelve  years.  Both  were  of  Romance  origin — 
one  of  noble,  the  other  of  ignoble  birth.  The  early 
life  of  each  was  wholly  dissimilar  in  disposition,  educa- 
tion, and  relation  to  the  Church.  The  causes  operating 
to  make  them  reformers  were  very  different.  St. 
Dominic  dreamed  of  an  aggressive,  skilfully-trained 
body  of  preachers  of  simple  life  to  convert  the  heretics 
and  to  instruct  the  orthodox,  thus  keeping  them  firm. 
St.  Francis  on  the  other  hand  made  poverty  the  first 
Christian  grace  and  sought  to  lead  all  men  back  to 
Jesus  as  the  great  model.  One  laboured  for  doctrinal 
orthodoxy,  the  other  for  personal  piety.  Both  applied 
to  Innocent  III.  about  the  same  time  for  a  permit  to 
found  a  new  order  and  both  were  successful.  Each 
order  in  its  purpose  was  reformatory  and  in  the  monastic 
world  revolutionary. 2  In  organisation  the  two  orders 
were  essentially  the  same :  each  had  a  governor-general 
at  Rome,  provincial  governors  in  the  provinces, 
priors  or  guardians  over  single  cloisters,  which  were 
simply  "homes"  and  not  convents  in  the  old  sense  and 

1  Moeller,  i.,  405. 

2  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  273. 


534     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

demanded  a  certain  type  of  life  for  the  members.  The 
vows  were  essentially  the  same,  although  the  Franciscans 
originated  and  the  Dominicans  adopted  that  of  poverty. 
Both  orders  devoted  themselves  to  preaching  and  to 

saving  souls. 

Education,  art,  morality,  and  religion  of  the  later 
Middle  Ages  were  in  a  large  measure  moulded  by 
the  influence  of  these  two  organisations.  Both  had 
great  scholars,  preachers,  teachers,  higher  clergy,  and 
popes. 

Whenever  in  the  thirteenth  century  we  find  a  man 
towering  above  his  fellows,  we  are  almost  sure  to  trace  him 
to  one  of  the  mendicant  orders.  Raymond  of  Pennaforte, 
Alexander  Hales,  Albertus  Magnus,  Thomas  Aquinas,  Bona- 
ventura,  Roger  Bacon,  and  Duns  Scotus  are  names  which 
show  how  irresistibly  the  men  of  highest  gifts  were  glad 
to  seek  among  the  Dominicans  or  Franciscans  their  ideal 
life.  *  - 

The  Franciscans  were  realists  and  Scottists;  the 
Dominicans,  nominalists  and  Thomists.  The  Fran- 
ciscans believed  in  the  immaculate  conception;  the 
Dominicans  denied  it .  Both  came  into  conflict  with  the 
secular  clergy.  They  could  not  say  mass,  but  were 
very  popular  confessors  and  thus  tended  to  deprive 
the  clergy  of  support  and  revenues  and  even  threatened 
to  supersede  the  old  ecclesiastical  system.  Women 
and  the  pious  as  a  rule  upheld  the  begging  orders,  while 
the  state,  the  soldiers,  and  the  men  took  the  part 
of  the  clergy.  In  both,  the  individual  was  compelled 
to  remain  poor,  while  the  society  became  dangerously 
rich.  The  Dominicans  were  aristocratic;  the  Fran- 
ciscans democratic. 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  266. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    535 


Each  order  borrowed  something  from  the  other:  St. 
Francis  took  St.  Dominic's  idea  of  itinerant  preachers; 
St.  Dominic  adopted  St.  Francis's  plan  of  poverty. 
Both  became  quickly  popular  and  both  had  exemptions 
and  privileges  showered  upon  them  by  Rome.1  Their 
members  could  not  be  excommunicated  by  any  bishop 
and  were  exempt  from  all  local  jurisdiction  save  that 
of  their  own  order. 2  They  had  a  right  to  live  freely 
in  excommunicated  lands.  Being  directly  responsible 
to  the  Pope  alone,  they  were  used  by  him  to  raise  money, 
to  preach  crusades,  to  sell  indulgences,  to  execute 
excommunications,  to  serve  as  spies  and  secret  police, 
and  to  act  as  papal  legates  on  all  kinds  of  missions. 
In  addition  to  practically  usurping  and  monopolising 
the  functions  of  preaching  and  confession  and  granting 
absolution,  they  were  finally  permitted  to  celebrate 
mass  on  portable  altars. 3  In  return  for  these  privileges 
each  order  gave  the  Pope  a  vast  army  which  overran 
Europe  in  his  name.  Both  orders  helped  to  carry  on 
the  work  of  the  Inquisition.  4  Both  laboured  inces- 
santly in  the  missionary  field  and  from  the  thirteenth 
century  onward  they  were  the  great  missionary 
pioneers  in  Europe,  Asia,  Africa,  and  America.  Both 
had  a  tertiary  order  of  laymen  which  went  far  to 
remove  the  barrier  between  the  ecclesiastic  and  the 
people.  From  this  comparison  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
Franciscans  and  Dominicans  were  much  more  alike 
than  unlike  in  their  origin,  leaders,  aims,  methods, 
and  results.  After  the  thirteenth  century  both  de- 
parted from  their  original  ideals,  became  corrupt, 
worldly,  and  very  unpopular. 

»  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  271,  272,  273.     Cf.  No.  268. 

2  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  274. 

3  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  271,  272,  273.  4  Ibid.,  299. 


536     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


A  third  begging  order  was  created  in  1243,  when 
Pope  Innocent  IV.  authorised  the  organisation  of  a 
band  of  Italian  monks  under  the  rule  of  St.  Augustine. 
I  Lanfranc  Septala  of  Milan  was  made  general  of  the 
order  and  provincial  rulers  were  appointed  for  Italy, 
Spain,  France,  and  Germany.  Under  Alexander  IV. 
in  1256  they  assumed  the  rights  and  duties  of  a  mendi- 
cant order  and  in  1287  they  were  taken  under  the 
particular  protection  of  the  Pope.  They  soon  spread 
rapidly  over  western  Europe  and  by  the  fifteenth 
century  covered  forty-two  provinces,  had  two  thousand 
monasteries,  and  thirty  thousand  monks.  It  was  this 
order  which  young  Martin  Luther  entered  in  1505  at 
Erfurt. 

No  better  summary  of  the  general  results  of  the 
begging  orders  has  ever  been  made  than  that  of  Lea 
when  he  says : 

The  Mendicants  came  upon  Christendom  like  a  revela- 
tion— men  who  had  abandoned  all  that  was  enticing  in 
life  to  imitate  the  Apostles,  to  convert  the  sinner  and  un- 
believer, to  arouse  the  slumbering  sense  of  mankind,  to 
instruct  the  ignorant,  to  offer  salvation  to  all;  in  short 
to  do  what  the  Church  was  paid  so  enormously  in  wealth 
and  privileges  and  power  for  neglecting.  Wandering  on 
foot  over  the  face  of  Europe,  under  burning  suns  or  chilling 
blasts,  rejecting  alms  in  money  but  receiving  thankfully 
whatever  coarse  food  might  be  set  before  the  wayfarer,  or 
enduring  hunger  in  silent  resignation,  taking  no  thought 
for  the  morrow,  but  busied  eternally  in  the  work  of  snatching 
souls  from  Satan,  and  lifting  men  up  from  the  sordid  cares 
of  daily  life,  of  ministering  to  their  infirmities  and  of 
bringing  to  their  darkened  souls  a  glimpse  of  heavenly 
light — such  was  the  aspect  in  which  the  earliest  Dominicans 
and  Franciscans  presented  themselves  to  the  eyes  of  men 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    537 


who  had  been  accustomed  to  see  in  the  ecclesiastic  only 
the  sensual  worldling  intent  solely  upon  the  indulgence 
of  his  appetites. 1 

In  the  busy  world  of  the  13th  century  there  was  then 
no  agency  more  active  than  that  of  the  Mendicant  Orders, 
for  good  and  for  evil.  On  the  whole  perhaps  the  good 
preponderated,  for  they  undoubtedly  aided  in  postponing  a 
revolution  for  which  the  world  was  not  yet  ready.  .  Though 
the  self-abnegation  of  their  earlier  days  was  a  quality  too 
rare  and  perishable  to  be  long  preserved,  and  though  they 
soon  sank  to  the  level  of  the  social  order  around  them, 
yet  their  work  had  not  been  altogether  lost.2 

The  degeneration  which  soon  crept  into  both  orders 
was  not  allowed  to  increase  without  efforts  of  reforma- 
tion. Within  fifty  years  after  the  death  of  St.  Francis, 
Bona ventura,  the  governor-genera]  who  succeeded 
him,  complained  that  the  vow  of  poverty  had  broken 
down,  that  the  Franciscans  were  more  entangled  in 
money  matters  than  the  older  orders  and  that  vast  sums 
were  lavished  on  costly  buildings.  He  declared  that 
the  friars  were  idle,  lazy  beggars  given  to  vice  and  so 
brazen  that  they  were  feared  as  much  as  highway 
robbers.  He  said  further  that  they  made  undesirable 
acquaintances  and  thus  gave  rise  to  grave  scandals, 
and  that  they  were  too  greedy  of  burial  and  legacy 
fees  and  thus  encroached  upon  the  parochial  clergy. 
St.  Francis  himself  had  been  compelled  to  resign  his 
generalship  on  account  of  the  abuses  and  offered  to 
resume  it  only  on  condition  of  reformation .  3  The 
second  general,  Elias,  the  shrewdest  politician  in  Italy, 
was  removed  by  Pope  Gregory  IX.     It  was  high  time 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  266. 

2  Ibid.,  i.,  304. 

3  Ibid.,  295. 


538    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

therefore  that  a  high-minded  reformer  like  Bonaventura 
appeared,  for  by  a  series  of  steps  the  Franciscans 
changed  from  a  body  of  pietists  to  a  band  of  the  boldest 
swindlers.  As  preaching  and  soul -saving  died  out, 
the  begging  propensities  were  developed.  As  early 
as  1233  Gregory  IX.  told  the  Dominicans  that  their 
poverty  should  be  genuine  and  not  hypocritical.1 
The  wide  use  of  the  friars  by  the  Pope  for  political 
purposes  still  further  diverted  them  from  their  spiritual 
functions  and  tended  to  make  them  worldly. 

As  a  result  the  Franciscans  soon  broke  into  two 
parties:  (1)  The  liberals  who  were  not  averse  to 
dropping  the  vow  of  poverty  and  imitating  the  older 
monastic  orders  were  very  strong.  (2)  The  reform 
party  who  desired  to  adhere  rigidly  to  the  preaching 
and  practice  of  St.  Francis  were  probably  a  minority 
and  were  weakened  by  subdivisions.  One  faction  of  the 
strict  party  was  called  Spirituales,2  and  in  turn  was 
represented  by  the  Csesarins  who  revolted  against  the 
public  activity  of  Elias  and  were  punished  as  rebels; 
the  Celestines  who  were  permitted  to  exist  as  a  separate 
order  by  Pope  Celestine  V.  in  1294,  and  were  later 
denounced  as  heretics;  the  congregation  of  Narbonne 
which  was  formed  in  1282;  the  Clarenins  who  were 
accused,  of  heresy  in  13 18;  and  the  congregation  of 
Philip  of  Nyarca  which  was  formed  in  1308.  A 
second  reform  element  within  the  rigid  party  were  the 
Fratricelli,  authorised  by  Celestine  V.,  who  became 
revolutionists,  repudiated  the  Papacy,  left  the  Church, 
joined  the  Beghards,  thought  that  they  were  possessed 
with  the  Holy  Spirit  and  were  exempt  from  sin,  and 

1  See  letter  of  Innocent  III.,  about  monastic  simony  in  ran. 
Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  267. 

2  Muzzy,  The  Spiritual  Franciscans. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    539 


repudiated  the  sacraments  of  the  Church.  They 
were  condemned  as  heretics  and  the  Inquisition  was 
turned  against  them  in  Italy,  Sicily,  and  southern 
France,  but  they  lasted  until  the  Reformation.  Later 
reform  factions  among  the  Franciscans  were  the  Capu- 
chins (1526),  Minims  (1453),  Observants  (141 5),  and 
Recollects.  These  internal  reformers  failed  to  change 
the  order  because  the  rule  of  St.  Francis  was  utterly 
incompatible  with  social  life  in  any  form. 

For  three  centuries  the  Franciscans  and  Dominicans 
practically  ruled  the  Church  and  state.  They  filled 
the  highest  civil  ecclesiastical  positions;  they  taught 
authoritatively  in  the  universities  and  churches ;  they 
maintained  the  prerogatives  of  the  Roman  Pontiffs 
against  kings,  bishops,  and  heretics;  and  they  were 
to  the  Church  before  the  Reformation  what  the  Jesuits 
were  after  the  Reformation.  The  Mendicants  increased 
so  rapidly  however  that  they  soon  became  a  burden 
to  the  Church  and  the  people.  Hence  in  1272  Gregory 
X.  in  the  Council  of  Lyons  suppressed  the  "extravagant 
multitude"  by  reducing  them  to  four  orders:  the 
Dominicans,  the  Franciscans,  the  Carmelites,  and  the 
Augustinians. 

SOURCES. 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — Gerard  de  Frachet,  Lives  of  the  Brethren. 
2. — Eales,  S.  J.,  Letters  of  St.  Bernard.     Lond., 

1888. 
3. — Bonaventura,    The   Life  of  St.   Francis   of 

Assisi.     Lond.,  1868. 
4. — Brewer    and    Howlett,    Monumenta    Fran- 

ciscana. 
5. — Eccleston,  Arrival  of  the  Friars  in  England. 

Ed.  by  Brewer  and  Howlett  in  Pub.  Rolls 

Ser.,  1882. 


54o     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

6  —Legend  of  St.  Francis  by  the  Three  Companions. 

Tr.  by  E.  G.  Salter.     Lond.,  1902. 
7.— Brother  Leo  of  Assisi,  S.  Francis  of  Assisi, 

Mirror  of  Perfection.    Tr.  by  S.Evans.   Lond., 

1898. 
8.— The  Little  Flowers  of  St.  Francis  of  Assisi. 

Tr.  by  T.  W.  Arnold.     Lond.,  1898.     Several 

other  translations. 
9.— Legends  of  St.  Francis.     Cath.   Penny  Lib. 

Lond.,  1 90 1. 
10.— Manual  of  the  Third  Order  of  St.  Francis. 
11.— Third  Order.     Tr.   by  J.    G.    Adderley  and 

C.  L.  Marson.     Lond.,  1902. 
12. — Parenti,    P.,    Commercium    or   My    Lady's 

Poverty.     Tr.  by  Carmichael. 
13.— The  Franciscan  Fathers,  Spirit  of  St.  Francis 

of  Assisi,  or  Maxims  for  Every  Day  in  the 

Year.     Dub.,  1888. 
14. — Works  of  the  Seraphic  Father,  St.  Francis  of 

Assisi.     Tr.    by   a   Religious   of   the    Order. 

Lond.,  1890. 
15. — Brother  Leo  of  Assisi,   The  Mirror  of  Per- 
fection.    Tr.    by    Countess    De    La    Warr. 

Lond.,  1902. 
16. — Robinson,  Readings  in  European  History,  i., 

387,  391,  392. 
16.— Thatcher   and   McNeal,   A   Source-Book  for 

Mediceval  History,  498,  504,  508. 
17.— Ogg,   A.  F.,  The  Source-Book  of  Mediaeval 

Europe.     N.  Y.,  1908. 

B.— SECONDARY: 

1. — special: 
1. — Dominican: 

1. — Alemany,   T.,   Life  of  St.   Dominic  with   a 

Sketch    of    the    Dominican    Order.     N.    Y., 

1887. 
2. — Drane,  A.  T.,  The  Spirit  of  the  Dominican 

Order.     Lond.,  1896. 

The  History  of  St.  Dominic.     Lond.,  1891. 

The  Life  of  St.  Dominic.     Lond.,  1891. 
3. — Guirand,  J.,  Saint  Dominic     Tr.  by  Kath. 

de  Mattos.     Lond.,  1901. 
4. — Herkless,  J.,  Francis  and  Dominic  and  the 

Mendicant  Orders.     Lond.,  190 1. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    541 


5.— Fletcher,   W.   D.    G.,    The  Black  Friars  of 

Oxford.     Oxf.,  1882. 
6.—  Lacordaire,  H.   D.,  Life  of  Saint  Dominic. 

Lond.,  1883. 
7. — Short   Lives   of   Dominican   Saints.     Lond., 

1 90 1. 

II.  — FRANCISCANS : 

1. — Adderly,  J.,  Francis,   the  Little  Poor  Man 

of  Assisi.     Lond.,    1600.     Has    Rule   of   St. 

Francis. 

-Baring-Gould,  Lives  of  the  Saints. 

-De  Cherance,  F.  L.,  Saint  Francis  of  Assisi. 

Tr.  by  R.  F.  O'Connor.     Lond.,  1880. 
.—Cotton,  A.  L.,  A  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  St. 

Francis  of  Assisi.     Lond.,  1885. 

-Douglass,  Cap.,  Brother  Francis,  or  Less  than 

the  Least.     Lond.,  190 1. 
.— Faber,   F.   W.,   The  Life  of  St.  Francis  of 

Assisi.     2  vols.     Lond.,  1853-4. 
, — Lear,  H.   L.   S.,  Life  of  Francis  of  Assisi. 

N.  Y„  1888. 
. — Leon,  Father,  Lives  of  the  Saints  and  Blessed 

of  the  Three  Orders  of  St.  Francis.     5  vols. 

Taunton,  1885-8. 
9. — The  Life  of  Saint  Francis  of  Assisi;  and  a 

Sketch  of  the  Franciscan  Order,  by  a  Religious 

of  the  Order.     N.  Y.,  1867. 
10. — Little,  W.  J.  K.,  St.  Francis  of  Assisi,  his 

Times,  Life  and  Work.     Lond.,  1897. 
11. — Luther,  M.,  Preface  to  a  Book  of  Selections 

from  the  Legends  of  St.  Francis.     Brighton, 

l845-  .  t    „ 

12. — Le     Monnier,    Abbe    Leon,    History   of   St. 

Francis    of    Assisi.     Tr.    by    a    Franciscan 

Tertiary.     Lond.,  1894. 
13. — Muzzy,    D.    S.,    The  Spiritual  Franciscans. 

Wash.,  1907. 
14. — Oesterley,  W.  O.  E.,  St.  Francis  of  Assisi. 

Lond.,  1901. 
15. — Oliphant,    Mrs.    M.    O.,    Francis  .of   Assisi. 

Lond.,  1870. 
16. — Sabatier,   P.,   Life  of  St.  Francis  of  Assisi. 

Tr.  by  Louise  S.  Houghton.     N.  Y.,  1894. 


542     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


17. — Westlake,  N.  H.  J.,  On  the  Authentic  Portrait- 
ure of  S.  Francis  of  Assist.     Lond.,  1897. 

18. — Vernet,  Abbe  Felix,  The  Inner  Life  of  St. 
Francis  of  Assist.  Tr.  by  Father  Stanislaus. 
Lond.,  1900. 

III.  — MISCELLANEOUS : 

1. — Browne,  E.  G.  K.,  Monastic  Legends.     Lond. 
2. — Brown,   J.    B.,   Stoics   and  Saints.     Glasg., 

1893. 
3. — Butler,  Lives  of  the  Saints. 
4. — Day,  S.  P.,    Monastic    Institutions.     Lond., 

1865. 
5. — Fosbroke,  T.  D.,  British  Monachism. 
6. — Fox,  S.,  Monks    and    Monasticism.     Lond., 

1848. 
7. — Gasquet,  F.  A.,  Notes  on  Mediaeval  Monastic 
Libraries.     Yevil,  1891.     Sketches  of  Medie- 
val Monastic  Life.     Yevil,  1891. 
, — Griffin,  Grandmont;  Stories  of  an  Old  Monas- 
tery.    N.  Y.,  1895. 

-Harnack,    A.,   Monasticism:   Its   Ideals   and 
Its  History.     Lond.,  190 1. 
. — Hill,   O.  T.,  English    Monasticism.     Lond., 

1867. 
. — Jameson,  Mrs.  A.,  Legends  of  the  Monastic 

Orders.     Lond.,  1880. 
, — Jessopp,  A.,  The  Coming  of  the  Friars.     N. 
Y.,  1889. 
13. — Lea,   H.   C,  History  of  the  Inquisition.     3 
vols.     History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy.     Phil., 
1884.     3d  ed.     2  vols.     N.  Y.,  1907. 
14. — Maclear,  History  of   Christian  Missions  in 

the  Middle  Ages. 
15. — Montalembert,    Count    de,    Monks    of    the 

West.     7  vols.     Lond.,  186 1-7. 
16. — Wishart,  A.  D.,  Short  History  of  Monks  and 
Monasticism.     N.  Y.,  1900. 
IV. — general: 

Alzog.  ii.,  507-522.  Adams,  Med.  Civ.,  401. 
Cutts.  Darras,  ii.,  121  ff. ;  iii.,  337  ff.  Dollin- 
ger,  ch.  23-24.  Fisher,  pd.,  6,  ch.  6.  Fitz- 
gerald, ii.,  54-106.  Foulkes,  398.  Gieseler, 
§67-72.  Gilmartin,  i.,  ch.  45;  ii.,  ch.  9-10, 
1 1 -1 3,    14.      Hase,    sec.    204-211.      Hore,    ch. 


Rise  of  Mendicant  Orders  in  the  Church    543 


14.  Hurst,  i.,  805  ff.  Jennings,  11.,  ch.  12-13. 
Kurtz,  ii.,  64-67.  Milman,  v.,  bk.  9,  ch. 
9-10.  Moeller,  ii.,  404  ff-  Neander,  pd.  5, 
sec.  2,  pt.  5,  268  ff.  Robertson,  bk.  5,  ch. 
7,   13.     Tout,  ch.   9,   18.      Workman,  ch.    7-8. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

INNOCENT  III.  AND  THE  CHURCH  AT  ITS  HEIGHT 
OUTLINE 

I. — Antecedent  preparation  for  this  period.  II. — Career  of 
Innocent  III.  up  to  1 198.  III. — Innocent  III.'s  plans  and  ideals  as 
Pope.  IV. — Condition  of  Europe  at  the  close  of  the  twelfth 
century.  V. — Innocent  III.  makes  himself  the  political  head  of 
Europe.  VI. — Innocent  III.'s  efforts  to  root  out  heresy  and 
reform  the  Church.  VII. — Innocent  III.'s  character  and  the 
general  results  of  his  pontificate.     VIII. — Sources. 

MANY  antecedent  forces  prepared  the  way  for 
the  ascendency  of  the  Church  under  the  greatest 
of  all  the  Popes,  Innocent  III.  The  promulga- 
tion of  the  Petrine  theory  and  its  development  for  many 
centuries  afforded  the  fundamental  groundwork  upon 
which  the  Church  at  its  height  was  built.  The  Pseudo- 
Isidorian  Decretals  furnished  the  constitutional  basis 
for  the  work  of  this  master  Pope  and  their  most  com- 
plete realisation  culminated  under  his  rule.  The 
Hildebrandine  reformation,  inspired  by  the  Pseudo- 
Isidorian  Decretals,  was  largely  attained  under  In- 
nocent III.  The  reorganisation  of  the  College  of 
Cardinals  tended  to  purify  papal  elections.  The 
administrative  reforms  of  Hildebrand  restored  order 
in  the  Church  and  subjected  the  councils  and  clergy 
to  the  Pope.  The  moral  reforms  attempted  sought: 
(1)  to  enforce  clerical  celibacy  and,  although  a  failure 
immediately,  ultimately  were  successful ;  (2)  to  abolish 

544 


Innocent  III.  545 


simony — a  task  that  was  left  for  the  great  Innocent; 
(3)  and  to  annihilate  lay  investiture  which  was  partly 
successful  in  the  Concordat  of  Worms  formed  in  11 22. 
Gregory  VII.  had  sought  also,  to  subject  the  state 
to  the  Church.  Some  of  his  successors,  notably  Urban 
II.,  Pascal  II.,  Calixtus  II.,  and  Alexander  III., 1  strove 
valiantly  to  realize  this  same  purpose.  The  complete  | 
realisation  of  all  these  hopes,  however,  was  left  for 
Innocent  III. 

Innocent  III.  was  born  in  11 60  at  Anagni  and  bore 
the  name  Lothario.  He  was  the  fourth  son  of  a  rich 
noble  Italian  family  named  Conti.2  His  father  was 
Count  Trasimundo  of  Segni  and  his  mother  belonged  to 
the  noble  Roman  Scotti  family  which  had  given  the 
Church  nine  Popes  and  thirteen  cardinals.  It  is 
not  unreasonable  to  believe,  therefore,  that  the  young 
Lothario  inherited  from  his  ancestors  both  a  capacity 
and  a  desire  for  an  important  position  in  the  Church. 
His  education  was  the  best  obtainable  at  that  day  and 
was  begun  under  the  direction  of  two  cardinal  uncles. 
He  was  sent  to  Rome  to  one  of  the  schools  attached 
to  all  the  churches  and  there  received  his  elementary 
education  and  likewise  his  preparation  for  the  univer- 
sity. When  properly  qualified  he  entered  the  Uni- 
versity of  Paris  where  he  studied  philosophy  and 
theology  under  the  celebrated  Peter  of  Corbeil.  While 
there  he  probably  visited  England  in  order  to  make  a 
pilgrimage  to  the  shrine  of  Thomas  a  Becket.  From 
Paris  he  was  sent  to  Bologna  University  where  he 
studied  civil  law  and  especially  canon  law,  then  a  very 
popular  subject.     He  mastered  the  whole  system  of 

1  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  105;  Henderson,  420. 

2  Barry,  The  Papal  Monarchy,  287,  calls  him  "a  Roman  with 
Northern  blood  in  his  veins." 


546     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

decretal  lore  and  made  it  his  guide  for  the  rest  of  his 
life.  In  1181  he  returned  to  Rome,  a  university 
graduate,  only  twenty-one  years  of  age,  yet  celebrated 
for  his  theological  and  legal  erudition. 

Everything  pointed  him  toward  a  career  in  the 
Church — his  character,  his  birth  as  the  youngest  son 
of  a  noble,  his  family  connections  with  the  Church, 
his  education,  and  his  natural  inclination.  It  is  no 
surprise,  consequently,  to  learn  that  upon  his  return 
to  the  Eternal  City  he  was  made  a  canon  of  St.  Peter's 
(1181).  Gregory  VIII.  (1187),  promoted  him  to  the 
office  of  subdeacon  and  Clement  III.  (1190),  his 
maternal  uncle,  made  him  cardinal-deacon.  He  now 
became  the  chief  papal  adviser,  was  a  recognised 
leader  in  the  College  of  Cardinals,  though  only  twenty- 
nine  years  of  age,  and  was  generally  known  as  a  second 
Hildebrand.  Upon  the  election  of  Pope  Celestine  III. 
(1191-1198),  the  leader  of  a  rival  party,  the  young 
churchman  deserted  practical  church  work  and  church 
politics  to  devote  himself  to  study  and  literary  work. 
He  wrote  several  books  of  importance  which  reveal  his 
deep  and  extensive  culture,  his  ascetic  spirit  resembling 
that  of  Hildebrand  and  Luther,  his  lofty  ideals  of  the 
Papacy,  and  his  mediaeval  theology. l 

Celestine  III.  died  January  8,  1198,  urging  the 
cardinals  to  elect  his  nephew  John,  Cardinal  of  St. 
Paul's,  as  his  successor.  But  the  sacred  college  at  once 
unanimously  elected  Cardinal  Lothario,  the  youngest 
of  their  number,  only  thirty-seven,  as  Pope  and  saluted 
him  as  Innocent  III.     His  ability  and  life  had  marked 

1  He  wrote:  De  contemptu  mundi,  sivi  de  miseria  humance  con- 
ditionis  (Migni,  vol.  217.  Parttr.  in  Greenwood,  v.,  349);  Mysterio- 
rum  Evangelicce  Legis  et  Sacramenti  Eucharistee;  De  Quadrioartita 
Specia  Nuptiorum  (lost). 


Innocent  III.  547 


him  out  for  several  years  as  the  next  occupant  of 
St.  Peter's  See.  Being  only  in  deacon's  orders  he  was 
first  advanced  to  the  priesthood  (Feb.  21)  then  con- 
secrated bishop  and  crowned  Pope  with  an  elaborate 
ceremony  of  installation  (Feb.  22).* 

Innocent  III.  came  to  the  papal  chair  with  a  belief 
in  man's  utter  depravity  and  in  the  Pope's  power  to 
pardon  all  sin  and  to  remit  all  penances.  After  his 
election,  but  before  coronation,  he  declared: 

As  God  .  .  .  hath  set  in  .  .  .  the  heavens  two  great 
lights,  the  greater  to  rule  the  day,  the  lesser  to  rule  the  night, 
so  also  hath  He  set  up  in  His  Church  .  .  .  two  great  pow- 
ers :  the  greater  to  rule  the  day,  that  is  the  souls ;'  the  lesser 
to  rule  the  night,  that  is  the  bodies  of  men.  These  powers 
are  the  pontifical  and  royal:  but  the  moon,  as  being  the 
lesser  body,  borroweth  all  her  light  from  the  sun  both  in 
the  quantity  and  quality  of  the  light  she  sends  forth,  as 
also  in  her  position  and  functions  in  the  heavens.  .  .  . 
The  royal  power  borrows  all  its  dignity  and  splendour 
from  the  pontifical.2 

Again 

the  Lord  hath  fashioned  His  Church  after  the  model  of  the 
human  body  placing  the  Roman  Church  at  the  head,  thereby 
subjecting,  in  obedience  to  himself  and  her,  all  churches  as 
members  of  the  one  body  .  .  .  but  the  Church  without  the 
Pope  were  a  body  without  a  head.3 

His  whole  policy  was  summed  up  in  a  remarkable 
consecration  sermon  from  Luke  12:42: 

Who  is  this  steward  ?  It  is  he  to  whom  the  Lord  Omnipo- 
tent said,  Thou  are  Peter,  etc.     This  foundation  cannot  be 

«  Hurter,  vol.  i.,  89-90;  Greenwood,  vol.  v.,  371. 

2  Gesta  Inn.  III.,  sec,  ii.,  p.  3,  4. 

3  Ep.  Inn.  III.,  lib.  i.,  ep.  117,  335. 


548     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

shaken  ...  for  Christ  himself  is  on  board;  .  .  .  Christ 
is  the  rock  upon  which  the  Holy  See  is  founded ;  .  .  .  this 
chair  is  not  established  by  man  but  by  God  alone.  .  .  . 
Therefore  I  fear  not,  for  I  am  that  steward  whom  the  Lord 
hath  placed  over  His  household  to  give  them  their  meat 
in  due  season.  .  .  .  Therefore  my  desire  is  to  serve, 
not  to  rule.  ...  As  the  Lord's  steward  ...  I  must 
be  established  in  the  faith.  ...  But  faith  without 
works  is  dead.  My  works,  therefore,  must  be  wise  as 
well  as  faithful.  .  .  .  The  high-priest  of  the  Old 
Testament  was  the  type  and  pattern  of  the  Pope.  ...  I 
am  he  whom  the  Lord  hath  placed  over  His  household; 
yet  who  am  I  that  I  should  sit  on  high  above  kings  and 
above  all  princes?  For  of  me  it  is  written  in  the  prophets 
(Jer.  i  :  10) :  This  steward  is  the  viceroy  of  God,  the 
successor  of  Peter;  he  that  standeth  in  the  midst  between 
God  and  man.  He  is  the  judge  of  all,  but  is  judged  by  no 
one  .  .  .  Now  His  Household  is  the  whole  church  and 
this  household  is  one  .  .  .  out  of  which,  if  anyone  remain, 
he  and  all  his  shall  surely  perish  in  the  flood. 

The  germs  of  these  ideas  were  found  in  the  Pseudo- 
Isidorian  Decretals.  They  were  formulated  by  Hilde- 
brand  and  it  now  became  the  passionate  purpose  of 
Innocent  III.  to  realise  them  in  their  entirety.  To 
that  end  he  adopted  Hildebrand's  reform  program 
to  abolish  abuses  and  corruptions  of  all  sorts,  to  enforce 
celibacy,  to  subject  the  clergy  to  the  head  of  the  Church, 
and  to  make  the  Church  supreme  above  the  state. 

The  situation  in  Europe  at  the  close  of  the  twelfth 
century  was  such  as  to  aid  Innocent  in  his  great  plans. 
The  Crusades,  now  in  progress  for  a  century,  had 
aroused  a  terrific  religious  enthusiasm,  enriched  the 
Church,  increased  the  Pope's  power,  weakened  rival 
secular  authority,  and  paved  the  way  for  the  successful 


Innocent  III.  549 

realisation  of  Hildebrand's  ideals  by  Innocent  III. 
The  Papacy  was  well  established.  Its  dogmas  were 
expressed  in  canon  law,  its  machinery  was  completed, 
and  its  right  to  exist  as  a  state  resting  upon  a  territorial 
basis  was  recognised.  In  the  Empire  Henry  VI. 
had  died  in  1197,  Naples  was  ruled,  by  a  child,  the 
Guelphs  and  Ghibellines  were  at  war  in  the  Lombard 
cities  and  the  whole  Empire  was  distracted  and  almost 
reduced  to  anarchy  by  the  rival  claimants  to  the  im- 
perial throne.  In  France  Philip  Augustus,  a  tyrannical 
ruler,  ambitious  to  overthrow  the  English  king,  greedy 
to  swallow  up  the  larger  fiefs,  was  on  the  throne.  He 
had  divorced  his  Danish  wife  and  had  remarried.  At 
this  time  he  was  violently  opposed  by  both  the  nobles 
and  the  people.  In  Spain  the  lack  of  a  strong  central 
power  led  to  quarrelling  among  the  rival  kings  and 
compelled  the  Pope  to  interfere.  In  England  the 
brutal,  boisterous,  immoral  Richard  I.  died  in  11 99 
and  was  succeeded  by  the  tyrannical  and  feeble  King 
John  who  was  at  war  with  his  own  nobles.  In  the 
East  the  Slavic  nations  were  ready  to  accept  Roman 
rule  while  the  Eastern  Empire  was  tottering  and  ready 
to  fall.  In  general  parties  in  all  countries  were  crying 
out  to  the  Pope  for  assistance.  All  Europe  was  ripe 
for  just  such  a  man  as  Innocent  III.  with  just  such  a 
policy. 

The  first  step  in  Innocent's  plan  was  to  make  himself 
the  political  head  of  Europe.  In  Italy  he  first  made 
himself  absolute  sovereign  of  Rome  by  removing  all 
vestiges  of  imperial  rule.  The  senators  and  the  prefect, 
who  held  their  commissions  from  the  Emperor,  were 
required  to  take  oaths  to  him  as  their  sovereign.1 

1  Gesta,  sec.  8;  Ep.  i.,  23,  577;  Hurter,  i.  125;  Thatcher  and 
McNeal,  No.  123. 


550      The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

The  imperial  judges  were  also  replaced  by  his  own 
appointees.  By  persuasion  or  tactful  diplomacy  he 
gained  a  mastery  over  the  warring  Roman  nobles. 
From  Rome  he  gradually  extended  his  sway  over  the 
rest  of  Italy.  He  was  made  regent  of  Frederick  II., 
the  youthful  son  of  Henry  VI.,1  now  King  of  Sicily. 
He  forced  the  Tuscan  cities  to  recognise  his  suzerainty 2 
instead  of  that  of  the  German  Emperor,  and  subdued 
the  March  of  Ancona  and  the  Duchy  of  Spoleto.  3  He 
posed  as  the  champion  of  Italian  independence  and 
liberty  against  foreign  rule.  His  leadership  was  gen- 
erally recognised  and  he  was  called  "The  Father  of 
His  Country."  "Innocent  III.  was  the  first  Pope  who 
claimed  and  exercised  the  rights  of  an  Italian  Prince."  4 
When  Emperor  Otto  IV.,  ceded  all  the  lands  claimed 
by  the  Papacy  under  grants  from  former  rulers,  an 
indisputable  title  to  the  papal  states  was  established. 

In  Germany,  before  the  imperial  throne  was  made 
vacant  by  the  death  of  Henry  VI.  (1197),  the  princes 
had  been  persuaded  to  choose  his  infant  son,  Frederick, 
King  of  the  Romans.  But  the  election  had  been  set 
aside,  and  now  the  imperial  crown  was  claimed  by  two 
rival  claimants:  Otto  of  Brunswick  and  Philip  of 
Hohenstaufen,  a  brother  of  Henry  VI.  The  civil 
war  which  ensued  in  Germany  between  these  rival 
claimants  gave  Innocent  III.  his  opportunity.  Both 
claimants  appealed  to  the  Pope,  but  Otto  was  the 
more  submissive.  The  Pope  assumed  the  function  of 
arbiter  and   issued   a   famous   bull   favouring   Otto.s 

»  Greenwood,  v.,  376;  Ep.,  i.,  410.  A  papal  bull  declaring  Sicily 
a  papal  fief  was  accepted  without  opposition. 

2  Gesta,  sec.  ii. 

3  Ibid.,  sec.  9,  10. 

4  Creighton,  i.,  p.  21. 

s  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  130. 


Innocent  III.  551 


Otto  promised  on  oath  protection  of  the  possessions 
and  rights  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  obedience  and 
homage  such  as  pious  Emperors  had  formerly  shown 
towards  the  Chair  of  Peter  (1201).  Still  victory 
did  not  come  to  Otto  and  the  Pope,  until  after  ten 
years  of  civil  strife  followed  by  the  assassination  of 
Philip.  In  1208  Otto  was  coronated  by  Innocent 
in  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  but  was  soon  caught  in  deeds  of 
treachery  to  the  Pope  and  excommunicated  and  de- 
posed (12 10),  and  died  forgotten  seven  years  later. 

Frederick  of  Sicily  was  anxious  to  become  King  of 
Germany  and  also  Emperor.  The  Hohenstaufen  party 
in  Germany  invited  him  to  visit  them  and  in  this 
Frederick  was  encouraged  by  Innocent  III.  Frederick 
made  some  important  concessions  to  the  Holy  See1 
(12 13),  was  victorious  in  Germany,  and  was  crowned 
Emperor  at  Aachen  after  the  Lateran  Council  in  121 5. 
After  a  most  remarkable  career  he  died,  however, 
a  rebel  against  the  Church  (1250).  When  death 
smote  down  Innocent  III.,  he  had  created  two  Em- 
perors, he  was  recognised  as  lord  paramount  over  the 
Empire,  and  he  ruled  personally  over  a  larger  domain 
in  the  Empire  than  any  preceding  Pope. 

In  France  Philip  Augustus  had  been  excommunicated 
by  Pope  Celestine  III.  (1196)  for  having  divorced  his 
wife,  a  Danish  Princess  in  order  to  marry,  with  the 
sanction  of  the  French  clergy,  Mary,  the  daughter  of 
the  Duke  of  Bohemia.  Immediately  after  his  election 
and  before  his  coronation,  Innocent  III.  took  up  this 
case.  He  ordered  Philip  to  put  away  his  concubine 
and  to  take  back  his  lawful  wife  under  the  threat  of 
pronouncing  his  children  bastards  and  of  putting  his 

1  Mon.  Ger.,  ii.,  224;  Greenwood,  v.,  510;  Thatcher  and  McNeal, 
No.  135,  136. 


552     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


land  under  an  interdict.  Since  the  king  turned  a 
deaf  ear  to  these  demands,  the  Pope  excommunicated 
him,  declared  France  under  an  interdict, J  and  punished 
the  French  bishops.  As  a  result  Philip  was  compelled 
to  submit,  and  agreed  to  take  back  his  wife  and  to 
restore  confiscated  Church  lands.  This  was  a  great 
and  significant  victory  for  the  Pope. 

In  Spain  the  King  of  Leon  had  married  a  cousin 
contrary  to  canon  law.  The  Pope  immediately  an- 
nulled the  marriage.  The  king  refused  at  first  to  give 
up  his  wife,  but  was  forced  to  submission  by  excom- 
munication. 2  The  Kings  of  Navarre  and  Castile  were 
compelled  to  make  peace  and  to  unite  against  the  Sara- 
cens. Portugal  was  declared  a  fief  of  the  Holy  See  and 
the  king  was  commanded  to  hurry  up  the  payment  of 
tribute.3  The  King  of  Aragon  was  crowned  by  the 
Pope  at  Rome  as  a  feudal  vassal. 4 

In  England  King  John,  who  had  succeeded  Richard 
I.  in  1 1 99,  had  embittered  against  him  nobles,  clergy, 
and  common  people  by  extortions  and  tyrannical 
acts  of  all  sorts.  He  aroused  the  wrath  of  Innocent 
III.  by  making  a  treaty  of  peace  with  Philip  Augustus 
of  France,  while  that  ruler  was  still  under  the  ban 
for  repudiating  his  first  wife  and  marrying  another. 
John  had  likewise  boldly  ousted  the  Bishop  of  Limoges, 
confiscated  his  lands,  and  revived  the  Constitutions  of 
Clarendon,  s  Innocent  III.  immediately  called  John  to 
account  for  these  misdemeanours 6  and  forced  the  stub- 
born king  to  promise  to  make  a  crusade  to  atone 

>  Ogg,  §66. 

2  Gesta,  sec.  58. 

3  Ep.  i.,  99,  249,  446. 

«  Greenwood,  v.,  456;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.   118. 

5  Henderson,  1  r. 

6  Lee,  Source-Book  of  Eng.  Hist.,  sec.  66. 


Innocent  III.  553 

for  his  sins.  The  Pope  demanded  the  immediate  re- 
instatement of  the  Bishop  of  Limouges  in  his  office 
and  lands. i  He  treated  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon 
as  if  they  had  been  repealed  and  waited  for  his  oppor- 
tunity to  humble  the  haughty  English  ruler. 

In  1205  (July  13),  Hubert  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury died.  That  same  night  the  monks  of  the  Cathe- 
dral elected  their  sub-prior  as  archbishop  and  hurried 
him  off  to  Rome  for  papal  confirmation.  King  John, 
backed  by  the  suffragan  bishops  of  the  diocese,  ap- 
pointed and  invested  the  Bishop  of  Norwich  as  arch- 
bishop and  he  also  started  for  Rome  to  get  the  papal 
sanction.  Here  was  the  opportunity  for  which  Inno- 
cent III.  was  looking.  Both  elections  were  declared 
void  and  the  fifteen  monks  of  Canterbury  were  brought 
to  Rome  where  they  were  forced  to  choose  Cardinal 
Stephen  Langton  as  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 2  The 
Pope  consecrated  Langton  to  the  new  office  and 
demanded  King  John's  approval.  John's  rage  was 
unbounded.  He  impeached  the  monks  for  treason 
and  expelled  them  from  England  on  pain  of  death. 
He  confiscated  the  property  of  the  see  and  the  chapter 
of  Canterbury  and  told  the  Pope  bluntly  that  he  would 
never  permit  the  illegally  elected  stranger  to  set  foot  on 
English  soil.  The  Pope  first  threatened  the  king  with 
an  interdict,  which  merely  produced  angry  and  obsti- 
nate counter  threats  from  John,  and  then  in  1208 
actually  published  the  interdict. 3  The  king  retaliated 
by  seizing  Church  property,  abusing  the  clergy,  exil- 

»  Ep.  v.,  66. 

2  See   Roger  of  Wendover's  Chronicle,   for  facts  about  life  of 
Langton,  and  Hook,  Lives  of  Archbishops  of  Cant.,  ii.,  657. 

3  Cf.  Roger  of  Wendover,  Chronicle,  tr.  by  Giles.     Lee  Source- 
Book,  sec.  67;  Colby,  No.  29. 


554     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

ing  the  bishops,  and  confiscating  the  estates  of  their 
relatives. 

Determined  to  humble  the  stubborn  monarch,  Inno- 
cent III.  in  1210  formally  excommunicated  John  and 
deposed  him  from  the  kingship. l  The  English  crown 
was  given  to  Philip  II.  of  France  who  at  once  prepared 
an  army  to  invade  England.  At  the  same  time  John's 
followers  deserted  him  and  in  this  desolation  he  was 
compelled  to  accept  humiliating  terms  of  unconditional 
surrender.2  He  agreed  to  reinstate  all  prelates  to 
office  and  property ;  to  pay  a  full  indemnity  to  all  laity 
and  clergy,  eight  thousand  pounds  being  paid  down 
as  a  guarantee;  to  make  the  Pope  arbiter  about  all 
sums  of  restitution ;  to  give  the  Pope  all  right  to  Church 
patronage  in  England;  to  reverse  all  outlawries;  and 
to  surrender  his  crown  and  kingdoms  of  England  and 
Ireland  to  the  Pope  and  then  to  receive  them  back  as 
the  sworn  vassal  of  Rome,  paying  therefor  the  annual 
sum  of  one  thousand  marks  of  silver. 3 

When  the  English  barons  wrested  from  the  stubborn 
king  the  great  Magna  Charta  in  1215, 4  Pope  Innocent 
III.  championed  the  cause  of  the  king,  his  vassal,  against 
the  barons.  He  called  a  council,  annulled  the  Magna 
Charta,  issued  a  manifesto  against  the  barons,  and 
ordered  the  bishops  to  excommunicate  them.s  He 
suspended  Archbishop  Langton  from  office  for  siding 
with  the  barons  against  the  king  and  directly  appointed 


»  Lee,  Source-Book,  sec.  68,  69. 

2  Ibid.,  sec.  71. 

'Greenwood,  v.,  587;  Ep.,  xvi.,  77;  Lee,  Source  Book,  sec.  72, 
73,  74.     Gee  and  Hardy,  No.  xxv. 

4  Roger  of  Wendover,  Chronicle,  tr.  by  Giles,  ii.,  304.  Lee, 
Source-Books. 

*  Rymer,  i.,  135;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  129. 


Innocent  III.  555 

the  Archbishop  of  York.  At  the  same  time  Prince  Louis 
of  France,  who  had  invaded  England  with  an  army, 
was  summarily  excommunicated  for  having  entered  a 
domain  of  the  Holy  See.  As  a  result  of  the  Pope's 
policy  King  John  of  England  became  a  suppliant 
vassal  of  Rome,  the  English  clergy  were  subjected  to 
the  Pope,  the  resources  of  England  were  put  at  the 
Pope's  command,  the  nobles  and  the  people  were 
thwarted  in  their  efforts  to  check  John  in  his  tyranny, 
and  Magna  Charta  was  declared  illegal  though  not 
invalidated. 

In  the  East  the  Latin  rulers  in  Palestine  and  at  Con- 
stantinople were  papal  vassals.  The  Pope  asserted 
his  supremacy  over  the  Eastern  Empire  in  refusing 
to  restore  the  Isle  of  Cyprus  and  in  demanding  a  council 
to  heal  the  schism.i  Leo,  King  of  Armenia,  threw 
both  his  church  and  his  kingdom  into  the  Pope's  arms 
for  protection.2  Bulgaria  was  won  away  from  the 
Greek  Church  and  her  king  was  given  a  crown  inde- 
pendent of  the  Eastern  Empire. 3  Hungary  was  treated 
as  a  vassal  kingdom  and  papal  protection  was  extended 
to  her  king. 

In  the  North  the  King  of  Norway  had  been  slain  by 
a  priest  who  then  compelled  the  bishops  in  1184  to 
crown  him  king.  Innocent  III.  took  up  the  case  and 
appointed  the  King  of  Denmark  and  the  Archbishop 
of  Norway  a  court  to  try  the  murderer  on  the  charge 
of  having  forged  papal  bulls  to  favour  his  coronation. 
His  supporters  were  excommunicated,  he  himself  was 
put  under  the  ban,  and  all  places  giving  him  shelter 
were  interdicted.     Even  the  Bishop  of  Ireland  was 

»  Gesta,  par.  60,  61;  Ep.,  i.,  353.  354- 
2  Ibid.,  iog,  no. 
J  Ibid.,  68,  70. 


556    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

rebuked  for  having  permitted  his  clergy  to  communicate 
with  the  "accursed  apostate."  The  Pope  reorganised 
the  northern  churches  and  tied  the  clergy  to  St.  Peter's 
Chair.  In  Poland  the  archbishop  was  censured  for 
neglecting  to  draw  the  spiritual  sword  in  favour  of 
Duke  Bo  Was  who  had  been  ill  treated  by  his  subjects. 
The  Duke  of  Holland,  a  faithful  vassal,  was  in  turn 
assisted  against  his  rebellious  subjects. 

No  occupant  of  St.  Peter's  Chair  was  more  sincerely 
impressed  with  the  beauty  and  necessity  of  rescuing 
the  Holy  Land  from  the  infidels  than  Innocent  III. 
He  sent  preachers  all  over  Europe  to  stir  up  a  holy 
war.  He  laboured  incessantly  to  pacify  and  unite  all 
rulers  under  his  guidance  in  this  great  enterprise. 
He  attempted  to  eliminate  the  mercenary  character  of 
the  crusade  by  forbidding  the  Venetians  to  traffic 
with  the  Mohammedans. i  But  he  strove  in  vain  to 
prevent  the  secular  diversions  and  consequent  failure 
of  the  Fourth  Crusade.  When  the  crusaders  in  ful- 
filment of  their  bargin  with  the  Venetians, 2  left  Venice 
to  attack  Zara,  a  Christian  city,  he  threatened  them 
with  excommunication.  After  the  deed  was  done, 
however,  he  granted  conditional  pardon. 3  The  capture 
of  Constantinople  was  likewise  censured  but  in  the  end 
lauded,4  although  he  strongly  urged  the  crusaders 
to  fulfil  their  original  vow.  s  So  skillfully  did  he  manip- 
ulate affairs  that  both  Greek  and  Latin  Emperors 
recognised  his  overlordship ,   the   Greek  Church  was 


»  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  286. 
2  Transl.  and  Reprints,  iii.,  No.  1,  p.  2-8. 
»  Gesta,  sec.  83,  85,  87. 

*  Ibid.,  sec.  89;  Epp.,  vii.,  164;  Transl.  and  Reprints,  iii.,  No.  1, 
p.  20. 

s  Gesta,  sec.  93. 


Innocent  III.  557 


subjected  to  Rome,  and  the  appointment  of  the  Patri- 
arch of  Constantinople  was  in  his  hands. 

Since  this  phase  of  the  fourth  crusade  fell  so  far 
short  of  its  original  aim,  Innocent  summoned  the 
Lateran  Council  in  121 5  to  proclaim  an  ideal  crusade 
for  June  1,  1216.1  The  Pope  intended  to  direct  the 
movement  in  person  or  by  legates.  The  usual  privileges 
were  granted  to  crusaders  and  a  variety  of  financial 
regulations  were  published  authorising  the  clergy  to 
sell  or  mortgage  Church  lands  for  three  years  in  order 
to  raise  necessary  funds;  urging  kings,  nobles,  cities, 
and  rural  districts  to  contribute  money  and  men,  and 
levying  a  tax  on  the  cardinals  and  the  head  of  the 
Church.  In  addition  the  Pope  contributed  out  of  his 
private  possessions  thirty-three  thousand  pounds  of 
silver  and  a  large  ship.  A  truce  for  four  years  was 
enjoined  on  all  Christian  princes  on  pain  of  excom- 
munication and  interdict.  Through  the  untimely 
death  of  the  Pope,  however,  while  he  was  going  to 
persuade  Pisa  to  join  in  the  crusade,  the  crusade 
did  not  mature,  but  later  the  Popes  were  not  slow 
in  claiming  the  leadership  granted  in  this  instance 
by  the  council  to  Innocent  III. 

In  no  direction  did  Innocent  III.  accomplish  more 
than  in  his  uncompromising  attack  on  heresy.  It 
must  never  be  forgotten  that  heresy  was  the  greatest 
crime  of  the  Middle  Ages.  God  had  planted  His 
Church  on  earth,  appointed  the  Pope  as  vice-gerent, 
and  prescribed  laws  and  dogmas  in  the  Bible  and 
the  canons  to  govern  the  Church.  Any  violation 
of  these  laws,  or  disbelief  in  the  dogmas,  was  heresy. 
Consequently,   heresy  was  treason  against  both  the 

1  Gesta,  sec.  98;  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  No.  288;  Robinson, 
Readings,  i.,  338. 


558     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Church  and  God.  A  heretic  was  like  a  man  with  a  dan- 
gerous, infectious  disease.  Not  only  was  he  himself 
in  mortal  danger,  but  he  might  inoculate  the  whole 
community  and  carry  it  too,  down  to  perdition.  It 
was  the  duty  of  the  Church,  therefore,  to  get  rid  of 
that  diseased  person  either  by  curing  him  through 
recantation,  or  ending  his  power  for  evil  by  death. 

The  existence  of  heresy  parallels  the  whole  history 
of  the  Church  and  suggests  a  universal  mental  attri- 
bute. The  causes  for  the  remarkable  growth  of  heresy 
are  to  be  found  in  the  departure  of  the  Church  from 
its  earlier  teachings  and  practices,  in  the  failure  of  the 
Church  to  make  its  theory  and  practice  harmonise, l 
in  the  remnants  of  earlier  doctrines  and  heresies,  and  in 
the  mental  awakening  of  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth 
centuries2  due  to  the  crusades  and  other  influences.3 
Among  the  leading  heretics  of  this  period  were : 

i.  Tanchelm,  who  carried  on  a  heretical  movement 
in  Flanders  (1108-1126),  teaching  the  historical  origin 
of  the  hierarchy,  the  pollution  of  the  Eucharist  in  the 
hands  of  a  bad  priest,  the  illegality  of  tithes  and  the 
congregational  view  of  church  government.4 

2.  Eon  de  TEtoile  in  Brittany  who  declared  that 
he  was  the  son  of  God  sent  to  reform  the  Church 
(1145-1148). s 

3.  Pierre  de  Bruys  who  preached  in  Vallonise  until 
he  was  burned  (1106-1 126),  declaring  infant  baptism 
useless,  offerings,  prayers,  and  masses  for  the  dead  of  no 
avail  since  each  one  would  be  judged  by  his  own  merits, 

>  Ep.,  I,  494. 

*  See  Munro,  "The  Ren.  of  the  Twelfth  Cent.,"  in  An.  Rep.  of  Am. 
Hist.  Assoc,  1906,  i.,  45. 

3  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  ch.  2. 

4  Ibid.,  i.,  64. 
s  Ibid.,  66. 


Innocent  III.  559 


churches  unnecessary,  the  use  of  the  cross  idolatry, 
the  Eucharist  a  mere  historical  incident  and  the 
Papacy  with  its  hierarchy  of  officials  a  blatant  fraud. l 

4.  Henry  of  Lausanne  who  deserted  his  monastery 
and  became  a  reformer  in  various  districts  in  France 
(1116-1147).  He  rejected  the  invocation  of  saints, 
taught  ascetism,  denounced  the  vice  of  the  clergy, 
discarded  the  Eucharist,  denied  the  sanctity  of  the 
priesthood,  declared  tithes  to  be  illegal,  opposed 
attendance  at  Church,  and  aroused  an  intense  zeal  for 
purity  and  piety.  Whole  congregations  left  their 
churches  and  joined  him.  At  last  the  Church  secured 
his  arrest  and  condemnation  to  imprisonment  for  life, 
but  he  appears  to  have  died  shortly  after. 2 

5.  Arnold  of  Brescia,  a  pupil  of  Abelard,  who 
travelled  in  various  parts  of  Italy,  France,  and  Germany, 
denouncing  infant  baptism,  rejecting  the  Eucharist, 
assailing  the  wealth  of  the  Church,  lashing  the  vices 
of  the  clergy,  and  organising  associations  of  "Poor 
Men"  until  he  was  finally  hanged,  then  burnt,  and 
his  ashes  thrown  into  the  Tiber. 3 

6.  Peter  Waldo  of  Lyons,  a  rich  but  ignorant  mer- 
chant, who  from  a  study  of  the  New  Testament  was 
led,  after  providing  for  his  family,  to  give  all  his  posses- 
sions to  the  poor.  *  He  became  an  ardent  preacher, 
won  converts,  and  sent  them  out  as  proselyting  mission- 
aries. He  and  his  followers  refused  obedience  to 
Pope  and  prelates  saying  all  good  men  were  priests, 
permitted  women  to  preach,  declared  God  and  not  man 
should  be  obeyed,  rejected  masses  and  prayers  for  the 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  vol.  i.,  68. 

*  Ibid.,  69. 

3  Ibid.,  72. 

«  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  380. 


560    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


dead  as  useless,  denied  purgatory,  assailed  indulgences, 
advocated  non-resistance,  denounced  war  and  homicide, 
attacked  all  the  vices  of  the  day,  and  organised  "The 
Poor  Men  of  Lyons"  which  order  soon  spread  under 
the  name  Waldenses  all  over  Europe. l 

7.  The  Catharists  who  appeared  during  the  Middle 
Ages  in  Lombardy  in  the  eleventh  century  and  soon 
spread  over  western  Europe  and  became  very  powerful. 
They  were  dualists  believing  in  God  and  Satan,  the 
spiritual  and  the  physical,  the  good  and  the  bad. 
They  held  that  Christ  came  to  overthrow  Satan 
and  that  the  Roman  Church  was  the  latter's  seat. 
They  rejected  the  authority  and  doctrines  of  the 
Church  and  had  a  distinct  ritual  of  their  own.  Soon 
they  broke  up  into  different  sects  with  different  names 
and  were  known  in  southern  France  as  Albigenses. 2 

Innocent  III.'s  theory  of  the  Papacy  clearly  indicated 
his  duty  about  heresy  and  the  co-operation  which 
he  might  demand  of  the  secular  powers. 3  In  the  first 
year  of  his  pontificate  (1198)  heretics  were  offered 
the  choice  of  recantation  or  death. 4  The  clergy  were 
likewise  ordered  to  mend  their  ways  in  order  to  remove 
the  cause  of  heresy,  s  Two  Inquisitors-General  were 
sent  to  Spain  and  France  where  the  clergy  were  directed 
to  give  them  information  about  heresy,  and  the  rulers 
and  laity  were  asked  to  help  the  "Persecution."6 
As  a  result  a  number  of  heretics  were  put  to  death 
in  Spain,  southern  France,  and  Italy.  The  following 
year  (1 199)  the  Pope  appointed  an  additional  Inquisitor- 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  76. 

2  Ibid.,  89;  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  381. 

3  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  385. 

4  Ep.,  i.,  94. 

5  Ibid.,  79,  80. 

6  Ibid.,  94. 


Innocent  III.  561 


General  for  Italy  and  added  a  third  for  France  and 
Spain.     They  were  all  kept  very  busy. 

In  1207  Innocent  in  person  led  a  force  against  the 
heretics  at  Viterbo  in  Italy.  The  heretics  fled  but 
their  houses  were  torn  down,  their  property  con- 
fiscated, and  a  search  made  for  suspects.  An  edict 
was  also  passed  decreeing  that  heretics  should  be 
treated  as  outcasts,  that  they  should  be  seized  and 
given  up  to  secular  rulers,  that  their  property  should 
be  confiscated,  that  their  hiding  places  should  be 
razed  to  the  ground,  that  their  protectors  or  sympathi- 
sers should  forfeit  one  fourth  of  their  property  and  be 
outlawed,  and  that  rulers  refusing  to  execute  the 
decree  should  be  excommunicated.1  The  same  year 
a  similar  edict  was  issued  against  the  heretics  in 
southern  France.  To  all  who  executed  the  decree  were 
offered  indulgences  like  those  given  devout  visitors 
to  the  shrines  of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  James.  On 
the  other  hand  those  who  aided  heretics  were  to  suffer 
the  same  punishment.2 

Innocent  appointed  a  fourth  Inquisitor-General 
and  sent  him  to  the  French  King  to  urge  him  to  help 
exterminate  the  heretics .  The  powers  of  the  Inquisitors 
at  the  same  time  were  enlarged.  The  Pope  now  de- 
creed a  general  war  against  "the  enemies  of  God  and 
man."  The  King  of  France  was  called  upon  to  draw 
the  sword,  while  the  nobles  and  people  were  summoned 
to  the  new  crusade  with  promises  of  the  same 
indulgences  as  given  to  those  who  went  as  soldiers 
to  Palestine.3  Count  Raymond  of  Toulouse  was 
harshly  excommunicated  and  deposed.     This  new  holy 

»  Ep.  vol.  ii.,  335. 

2  Ibid.,  i.,  94. 

3  Ibid.,  x.,  149. 


=;62     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


war  with  Simon  de  Monfort  as  leader,  was  preached 
amidst  much  enthusiasm.  A  bloody  war  of  extermi- 
na1  ion  was  carried  on  for  some  years  in  southern  France  * 
until  the  Albigenses  were  all  but  extinct.  As  a  result, 
the  Pope's  authority  was  greatly  increased,  Simon  de 
Montfort  was  made  Count  of  Toulouse,  while  Raymond 
was  exiled  to  England,  the  precedent  for  using  the 
crusading  machinery  against  heretical  regions  was 
established,  and  the  Inquisition  was  founded.  The 
Lateran  Council  in  12 15  defined  heresy  and  formu- 
lated complete  regulations  for  its  suppression. x 

Not  only  was  Innocent  III.  a  great  defender  of 
Church  dogmas,  a  master-organiser  of  the  hierarchy, 
and  an  administrator  without  a  peer  in  Church  history, 
but  he  was  also  a  far-reaching  and  sincerely  intelligent 
reformer.  The  judicial  reforms  were  necessary  to 
round  out  Innocent's  theory  of  Church  government. 
He  claimed  immediate,  personal  jurisdiction  over  all 
''causes  majores,"  such  as  disputes  of  the  clergy,  and 
all  questions  involving  the  interests  of  the  Church 
or  of  churchmen.  Consequently,  the  power  of  secular 
rulers  over  the  clergy  was  curtailed.  An  appalling 
number  of  cases  was  sent  for  settlement  to  the  curia 
at  Rome  and  cases  there  were  decided  with  a  speed  and 
punctuality  hitherto  unknown.  Innocent  III.  person- 
ally "held  court"  three  days  each  week,  heard  all  im- 
portant cases  and  rendered  the  decisions. 2  On  the 
other  hand  unimportant  cases  were  turned  over  to 
committees  under  his  eye.  He  insisted  upon  having 
honest  judges  all  over  Christendom  for  minor  cases  and 
enforced  his  will  by  making  an  appeal  to  Rome  sim- 
ple, easy,  and  inexpensive.3     All  bribes  and  gifts  to 

1  Greenwood,  v.,  641,  644.     Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  314,  320. 

2  Gesta,  sec.  41,  42.  3  Ep.,  i.,  335,  349-  399- 


Innocent  III.  563 


V 


judges  were  strictly  prohibited.  The  Lateran  Council  of 
1 2 15  modified  the  trial  of  clerical  offenders  by  insisting 
Upon  trial  in  the  presence  of  the  accused,  a  clear  state- 
ment of  the  charges,  a  list  of  witnesses  for  the  accused, 
and  no  appeal  before  the  rendering  of  a  decision  in  an 
inferior  court.1  Innocent  III.  also  took  all  treaties  X 
between  nations  uncfei  LhtTprotection  of  the  Church,2 
and  insisted  on  acting  as  supreme  arbiter  in  all  wars 
and  civil  feuds.  3 

The  necessity  of  moral  reformation  was  recognised 
by  Innocent  III.  from  the  beginning  of  his  pontificate. 
From  the  year  of  his  election  he  endeavoured  to  abolish 
all  those  debilitating  corruptions  which  prevented  the 
realisation  of  his  ideal  priesthood;  namely,  pluralism, 
luxury,  rapacity,  pride,  arrogance,  and  other  evils. 
The  clergy  were  emphatically .  commanded  to  free 
themselves  of  these  abuses  and  severe  orders  were  given 
to  his  legates  to  root  out  these  evils.4  In  121 5  the 
Lateran  Council  was  called  for  the  "extirpation  of 
vices,  the  planting  of  virtues,  the  correction  of  abuses, 
and  the  reformation  of  morals."  All  the  clergy  were 
urged  to  note  the  evils  needing  amendment  and  to 
correct  the  same. s  In  a  sermon  opening  this  remark- 
ably representative  council  the  Pope  urged  the  clergy 
to  reform  themselves  so  that  they  could  the  better 
lead  their  flocks  aright. 6  Many  reformatory  measures 
were  enacted  by  this  Council.  Nepotism  was  prohibited, 
monastic  abuses  were  corrected;  pluralities  were  for- 
bidden; the  extravagant  use  of  relics  was  curtailed;    p^- 

>  Greenwood,  v.,  651. 

2  Ep.,  i.,  130. 

3  Gesta,  sec.  133. 

4  Ep.,  i.,  79,  80. 

s  Ibid.,  xvi.,  30-34.     Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  i.,  41,  46. 

6  Matt.  Paris,  an.  1215;  Murat,  vii.    893;   Raynaldus,  an.    12 15. 


564     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  extortions  and  simony  of  the  clergy  were  abolished 
;  nd  renewed  stress  was  laid  on  the  canons  of  celibacy.1 
The  doctrinal  changes  instituted  by  Innocent  III. 
were  likewise  important.  The  dogma  of  transubstan- 
tiation  was  canonised  by  the  Lateran  Council  in  1215. 
Before  that  time  there  had  been  many  and  divergent 
views  concerning  this  important  subject.  The  leading 
motive  which  actuated  Innocent  in  having  this  doctrine 
carefully  defined  was  to  destroy  heresy.  In  consequence 
of  the  new  dogma  the  sacerdotal  body  was  elevated 
by  being  given  a  holier  character  while  each  individual 
priest  employed  this  new  power  as  a  badge  of  divine 
dignity.  All  discussion  about  transubstantiation  now 
ceased.  Heresy  was  more  clearly  defined  than  ever 
and  the  Inquisition  was  canonised.  At  the  same 
time  the  unity  of  the  Church  on  its  doctrinal  side  was 
given  greater  emphasis.  The  canonical  restrictions 
on  marriage  were  relaxed.  The  earlier  rigid  law  had 
led  to  grave  abuses,  since  the  clergy  annulled  marriages 
and  bastardised  the  offspring  while  the  laity  made  it 
an  excuse  for  divorce  and  licentious  passion.  The 
prohibition  of  marriage  between  the  relative  of  a  second 
wife  and  a  first  was  removed.  The  degree  of  consan- 
guinity and  affinity  was  reduced  from  the  seventh 
to  the  fourth  canonical  degree.  Secret  marriages 
were  prohibited.  The  publication  of  the  bans  was 
made  necessary.  Confession  and  penitential  satisfac- 
tion were  prescribed  as  obligatory  at  least  once  a  year 
under  the  penalty  of  excommunication.  Physicians 
were  likewise  required  to  send  all  the  sick  to  the  priest 
first  to  have  their  souls  cured  before  any  effort  was 

1  Lea,  Hist,  of  Sac.  Celib.  By  the  thirteenth  century  celibacy  was 
generally  recognised  as  a  canon  all  over  the  Latin  Church,  but 
secret  alliances  continued  as  an  unmitigated  evil. 


Innocent  III.  565 


made  to  heal  the  body.     The  penalty  for  disobedience 
was  exclusion  from  the  communion. 

The  administrative  reforms  of  Innocent  III.  embraced 
a  wide  range  of  measures.  Honorary  precedence  was 
granted  to  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople.  Elections 
to  vacancies  in  the  Church  were  reduced  to  three  forms : 
(i)  A  committee  of  three  of  the  electors  was  to 
take  the  votes  and  to  declare  who  had  received  "the 
greater  and  sounder"  number;  (2)  a  committee  was  | 
to  be  empowered  to  appoint  for  the  whole  body  of 
electors;  (3)  a  choice  was  to  be  made  by  acclamation. 
All  lay  interference  was  excluded,  otherwise  the 
election  would  be  ipso  facto  illegal.  Papal  confirma- 
tion and  the  right  of  revision  were  carefully  guarded. 
Pluralities  were  strictly  prohibited.  Tithes  were  given 
precedence  over  all  other  taxes  and  dues,  and  the  clergy 
were  urged  to  guard  the  property  and  to  collect  all 
monies  of  the  Church. 1  The  right  to  transfer  ecclesias- 
tics was  reserved  to  the  Pope  alone.2  Finally  the 
Inquisition  was  instituted  for  the  purpose  of  suppressing 
heresy,  of  enforcing  doctrines  and  ordinances,  and  of 
reforming  the  Church. 

Innocent  III.  as  head  of  the  great  Church  easily 
outranked  every  ruler  of  his  day  and  stands  high  among 
the  greatest  leaders  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  of  all  ages.  | 
A  contemporary  describes  him  as  "  A  man  of  wonderful 
fortitude  and  wisdom — one  who  had  no  equal  in  his  own 
da}' ;  whereby  he  had  been  able  to  do  acts  of  miraculous 
power  and  greatness."  If  Hildebrand  was  the  Julius, 
Innocent  was  the  Augustus  of  the  Papal  Empire.  He 
seldom  miscalculated — his  clear  intellect  never  missed 
an  opportunity — his  calculating  spirit  rarely  erred — and 

1  Ep.,  i.,  205,  217,  250,  292,  294,  388,  416,  etc. 

2  Gesta,  sec.  34-45. 


566     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


he  combined  forbearance  with  vigour.  "Order,  method, 
unswerving  resolution,  inexorable  determination,  un- 
daunted self-assertion,  patience,  vigilance,  and  cunning, 
all  co-operating  to  the  accomplishment  of  a  single  well- 
defined  object — and  that  object  the  unlimited  extension 
of  the  political  power  of  the  Pontiff  of  kome — had 
achieved  a  signal  triumph  over  the  irregular,  the 
selfish,  and  the  impulsive  political  opposition  of  the 
secular  powers."1 

The  moral  character  of  his  reign  was  variously  viewed 
by  contemporaries.  The  English  clergy  generally  dis- 
liked him  and  a  writer  of  the  day  asserted  that  his 
death,  July  26,  1216,  caused  more  joy  than  sorrow. 
St.  Luitgarde,  the  prioress  of  a  Cistercian  Convent  in 
Brabant,  said  that  in  a  vision  she  had  seen  him  in  pur- 
gatory enveloped  in  flames  for  his  sins. 2  The  crimes  of 
ambition,  cruelty,  deceit  and  treachery  were  charged 
against  him  as  a  shrewd  political  intriguer.  The  practi- 
cal charity  and  genuine  humility  of  an  earlier  day — 
when  he  washed  and  kissed  the  feet  of  twelve  poor 
men  taken  from  the  street  every  Saturday3 — seemed 
to  disappear  in  the  multiplied  duties  of  a  world  ruler. 
His  piety,  honesty  of  purpose,  and  sincere  conviction 
of  his  great  mission  cannot  be  questioned.  Yet  for 
some  reason  the  Church,  for  which  he  did  so  much, 
has  never  seen  fit  to  canonise  this  great  Pope. 

No  other  wearer  of  the  papal  tiara  has  left  behind 
him  so  many  results  pregant  with  good  and  ill  for 
the  future  of  the  Church.  Under  him  the  Papacy 
reached  the  culmination  of  its  secular  power  and 
prerogatives.     The  principles  of  sacerdotal  government 

1  Greenwood,  v.,  666. 

2  Raynaldus,  an.  1216,  sec.  11;  Fleury,  H.  E.,  xvi.,  426. 
*  Gesta,  sec.  134. 


Innocent  III.  567 


were  fully  and  intelligently  elaborated.  The  code 
of  ecclesiastical  law  was  completed  and  enforced.  All 
the  Christian  princes  of  Europe  were  brought  to  recog- 
nise the  overlordship  of  the  successor  of  St.  Peter.  All 
the  clergy  obeyed  his  will  as  the  one  supreme  law. 
Heresy  was  washed  out  in  blood.  The  Pseudo-Isidorian 
Decretals  and  the  dreams  of  Hildebrand  had  been 
realised.  Yet  in  this  very  greatness,  wealth,  and 
strength,  were  the  germs  of  weakness  and  disease  which 
were  eventually  to  overthrow  the  great  structure 
reared  by  Innocent  [II.  and  his  predecessors. 

SOURCES. 

A.— PRIMARY: 

1. — Colby,    C.   W.,   Selections  from   the  Sources 

of  English  History.     Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  1899. 
2. — Gee,    H.,   and    Hardy.    W.    J.,    Documents 

Illustrative  of  English  Church  History.    Lond., 

1896. 
3. — Henderson,    E.    F.,   Select  Historical  Docu- 
ments of  the  Middle  Ages.     N.  Y.,  1892. 
4. — Innocent   III.,    The  Mirror  of  Man's  Lyfe. 

Lond.,  1576.     The  Droome  of  Doomsday.     Tr. 

by    G.    Gascoigne.     Lond.,    1576.     Bull    of 

March  3,1216.    Tr.  by  W.  Beaumont.   Lond., 

1886. 
5. — Lee,  G.  C,  Leading  Documents  of   English 

History.     Lond.,  1900. 
6. — Ogg,    F.    A.,    A    Source-Book   of   Mediceval 

History.     N.  Y.,  1908. 
7. — Robinson,    J.    H.,    Readings    in    European 

History,  {.,  338. 
8. — Thatcher   and   McNeal,    A    Source-Book  for 

Mediceval  History,  496,  497,  535,  537. 
B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Bower,  A.,  History  of  the  Popes,  vi.,  183  ff. 
2. — Greenwood,  T.,  Cathedra  Petri,  v.,  321-668. 
3 .  — Gurney ,  J.  H. ,  Four  Ecclesiastical  Biographies. 

Lond.,  1864. 


568    The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

Note:— There  is  no  good  biography  of  Innocent 
III.  in  English.  Langen,  Hurter,  Delitzsch 
have  excellent  works  in  German,  and  Jorry 
and  Luchaire  in  French. 

II. — general: 

Adams,  354,  269,  393,  4J4-  Allen,  ii.,  73,  80, 
82,  90,  99,  178.  Alzog,  ii.,  411-421.  Bryce,  ch. 
13.  Butler,  ch.  81,  82.  Coxe,  lect.  7,  sec.  6. 
Creighton,  i.,  21.  Crooks,  ch.  34.  Darras,  iii., 
311  ff.  Dollinger,  iv.,  ch.  3,  sec.  3.  Emerton, 
ch.  10.  Fisher,  pd.  6,  ch.  3.  Foulkes,  369,  398. 
Gibbon,  vi.,  36.  Gieseler,  ii.,  §54.  Gilmartin, 
ii.,  ch.  5-6.  Gregorovious,  bk.  ix.,  ch.  1-3. 
Guizot,  Hist,  of  Fr.,  ch.  18.  Hallam,  iii.,  ch.  6. 
Hardwick,  ch.  10,  sec.  1.  Hare,  ch.  13.  Hase, 
sec.  192.  Ingham,  ch.  1.  Jennings,  i.,  ch.  13. 
Kurtz,  sec.  96-109.  Milman,  bk.  9,  ch.  1-10. 
Milner,  iii.,  cent.  12,  ch.  6.  Moeller,  ii.,  275. 
Mosheim,  cent.  11,  pt.  2,  ch.  2.  Neander,  iv., 
173.  Platina,  ii.,  68-73.  Reichel,  242^.  Robert- 
son, bk.  6,  ch.  1.  Robinson,  ch.  14.  Tout,  ch. 
14. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

THE  MEDIEVAL  CHURCH  AT  ITS  HEIGHT 

Outline:  I. — Characteristics  of  the  thirteenth  century.  II  — 
Territorial  extent  and  wealth  of  the  Church.  III. — Organisation 
of  the  papal  hierarchy  completed.  IV.— The  legal  system  of  the 
Church.  V. — The  official  language  and  ritual  of  the  Church.  VI. — 
The  sacramental  system.  VII.— The  employment  of  art.  VIII. — 
The  Church  moulded  the  civilisation  of  Europe.     IX. — Sources. 

THE  thirteenth  century  was  an  age  "of  lofty 
aspirations  unfulfilled,  of  brilliant  dreams  unsub- 
stantial as  visions,  of  hopes  ever  looking  to 
fruition  and  ever  disappointed.  The  human  intellect 
awakened,  but  as  yet  the  human  conscience  slumbered, 
save  in  a  few  rare  souls  who  mostly  paid  in  disgrace  or 
death  the  penalty  of  their  precocious  sensitiveness."  ! 
The  thirteenth  century  left  as  a  legacy  to  the  fourteenth 
century  vast  activity  in  intellectual  progress,  but  a 
spiritual  desert.  Society  was  harder,  coarser,  and 
more  worldly  than  ever. 

Everywhere  in  western  Europe  the  Church  seemed 
to  have  attained  the  extreme  limits  of  its  claims.  The 
papal  theory  was  triumphant.  Temporal  rulers  were 
everywhere  subservient  to  the  ecclesiastics.  Locally 
the' clergy  ruled  the  masses  in  morals  and  religion; 
they  controlled  education  and  intelligence;  and  they 
practically  settled  all  social  and  industrial  questions. 

»  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  iii.,  57. 

S69 


57o     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


At  the  same  time  the  spirit  of  asceticism  was  never  more 
pronounced  than  in  the  early  Cistercians,  Carthusians, 
Dominicans,  Franciscans,  and  other  orders.  Mysticism 
stood  like  a  stone  wall  to  stem  the  tide  of  worldliness, 
of  wickedness,  and  of  disbelief.1  When  St.  Bernard 
preached  to  the  students  at  Paris  on  the  vanity  of 
study  and  induced  twenty  of  them  to  follow  him  into 
the  cloister  at  Clairvaux  he  was  attempting  a  very 
significant  social  revolution  which  culminated  in  St. 
Dominic  and  St.  Francis.  Nevertheless^  in_the  very 
face  of  the  ascendancy  of  the  Roman  hierarchy  and 
notwithstanding  the  spiritual  revival  within  the 
Church,  there  appeared  a  vast  amount  of  heresy,  of 
irreverence,  and  of  independence.  The  spirit  of  m- 
dividuality  was  abroad.  Men  became  less  obedient  to 
authority  and  began  to  doubt  the  truth  of  what  was 
taught  them.  This  wide-spread  distrust  led  to  a  shift- 
ing from  one  authority  to  another,  rather  than  an  entire 
rejection  of  all  authority.2 

The  wealth  and  power  of  the  clergy  and  nobility 
had  decreased ;  the  burghers  had  advanced  to  a  position 
of  influence  and  self-consciousness.  Guilds,  the  awak- 
ened spirit  of  nationality,  and  self-governing  communes 
were  democratic  factors  to  be  taken  into  account. 
The  rise  of  the  luwer  classes,  and  the  consequent 
decline  of  the  upper  classes,  show  that  a  new  era  is 
dawning  over  Europe.  The  bourgeois  literature  re- 
veals a  mocking  contempt  for  nobles  and  bishops  alike. 
There  was  a  great  deal  of  flippant  wit  which  spared  no 
topic  and  no  individual.     "  God  and  the  devil,  Aristotle 


i  Moeller,  ii.,  436. 

2  Munro,  "The  Renaissance  of  the  Twelfth  Century,"  in  An.  Rep. 
Am.  Hist.  Assoc,  1906,  i.,  p.  45. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    571 


and  the  Pope,  canon  and  feudal  law,  Cistercians  and 
priests  were  held  up  to  ridicule."  i  The  subjects  of 
popular  songs  are  no  longer  exclusively  the  virtues 
of  asceticism  and  humility,  obedience  to  God  and  the 
feudal  lord;  but  love  of  woman  and  the  carnal  joys  of 
life  have  become  popular  themes.  Villains  achieve 
paradise  by  trickery.  Men  continuail}'  outwit  Satan. 
A  famous  jongleur  even  shakes  dice  with  St.  Peter, 
and  beats  him  at  the  game.  Verily  a  new  chapter 
was  opening  in  the  history  of  Europe. 

Severe  criticism  of  the  iniquity  and  depravity  of  the 
clergy,  their  greed  for  wealth  and  position,  and  particu- 
larly their  contempt  for  their  sacred  obligations,  came 
from  several  sources. 

(1)  The  best  men  in  the  Church,  among  whom 
are  Popes,  bishops,  abbots,  priests,  and  monks.  Their 
letters  and  sermons  reveal  flagrant  abuses  and  an 
earnest  cry  for  reform. 

(2)  The  acts  of  Church  councils  and  synods  show 
the  general  recognition  among  the  clergy  of  the 
presence  of  grave  irregularities  and  evils,  and  also  a 
consciousness  of  their  destructive  tendencies. 

(3)  The  general  impression  of  selfishness  and  wick- 
edness, which  the  Church  officials  made,  soon  was 
reflected  in  the  satirical  poems  of  the  popular 
troubadours  and  by  the  sprightly  versifiers  of  the 
courts.2 

(4)  The  laity  of  course  were  not  slow  to  under- 
stand conditions  and  became  scathing  critics.  These 
lay  censors  in  many  instances  went  far  beyond  the 


1  Munro,  "The  Renaissance  of  the  Twelfth  Century,"  in  An.  Rep. 
Am.  Hist.  Assoc,   1906,   i.,  p.  47. 

2  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  ch.  17. 


572     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


clerical    reformers.     While    the    better    clergy    urged 
the  elimination  of  current  abuses  not  one  of  them 
dreamed  of  denying  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the 
Church  or  the    efficacy  of    its    ceremonies.     On  the 
*Z    contrary,  the  lay  leaders  became  very  extreme.     They 
declared  that  the  Church  was  the  creation  and  home 
of  the  devil;  that  no  one  ought  to  believe  any  longer 
that    salvation    came    only   through    sacerdotal  min- 
istrations;   that    all    theatrical    ceremonies    were     of 
V  no    avail ;    that   the   masses,    relics,  holy  water,  and 
^indulgences    were    mere    priestly    tricks    for  money- 
"^jnaking  purposes  and   not  certain   means   of   gaining 
"^paradise.     These   extreme   opponents   of   the    Church 
soon    gained    followers    all    over    Christendom,    from 
all  social  classes  and   on  account   of   a  great   many 
reasons. 

From  the  standpoint  of  ecclesiastical  law,  however, 
these  drastic  critics  who  questioned  the  teachings  of 
the  Church,  and  proposed  to  repudiate  it,  were  guilty 
of  the  grave  crime  of  heresy.  The  attempt  to  crush 
the  wide-spread  heresies  of  the  thirteenth  century 
forms  an  awful  chapter  in  the  history  of  the  mediaeval 
Church.  The  rise  of  the  Albigenses,  the  Waldenses, 
and  other  heretical  sects  forced  the  Church  to  take 
drastic  measures  against  these  dangerous  foes.  Before 
the  close  of  the  twelfth  century  secular  rulers  were  in- 
duced to  take  measures  against  heresy.  In  England 
Henry  II.  in  1166  ordered  that  no  one  should  harbour 
heretics,  and  that  any  house  in  which  they  were  received 
should  be  burned.  In  Spain  the  King  of  Aragon  in 
1 1 94  decreed  that  any  one  who  should  listen  to  the 
Waldensians,  or  even  give  them  food,  should  have 
his  property  confiscated  and  suffer  death.  These 
measures  began  a  series  of  merciless  decrees  which  even 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    573 


the  most  enlightened  rulers  of  the  thirteenth  century- 
passed  against  heretics  and  their  abettors.1 

The  Church  was  not  slow  to  utilise  this  power.  A 
determination  to  extirpate  these  dangerous  heretics 
with  the  sword  produced  the  crusade  against  the 
Albigensians.  The  Inquisition  was  also  organised  to 
ferret  out  secret  heretics  and  to  bring  them  before 
inquisitorial  tribunals  for  punishment.  The  unfairness 
of  the  trials  and  the  heartless  treatment  of  su  pects 
have  rendered  the  name  of  the  Inquisition  infamous.2 

From  an  early  day  the  Church  exercised  a  censorship 
over  all  books.3  The  first  specific  instance  was  that 
of  a  synod  of  bishops  in  Asia  Minor  about  150  a.d., 
which  prohibited  the  Acta  pauli.  After  that  the 
condemnation  of  books  was  not  at  all  uncommon.4 
The  first  papal  Index  was  issued  in  494  by  Pope 
Gelasius  I.,  who  made  a  definite  catalogue  of  works 
prohibited.  Councils  condemned  books  as  heretical, 
while  Popes  prohibited  their  use,  destroyed  them,  and 
punished  those  who  violated  the  law.  This  policy 
was  continued  throughout  the  Middle  Ages.  Naturally 
the  Church  was  just  as  desirous  of  getting  rid  of  heret- 
ical books  as  of  suppressing  the  obnoxious  authors.5 

In  territorial  extent  the  Roman  Church  of  the 
thirteenth  century  included  Italy  and  Sicily,  Spain 
except  the  southern  part,  France,  Germany,  Hungary, 
Poland,  England,  Ireland,  and  Scotland,  Scandinavia 
and  Iceland,  the  Eastern  Empire,  though  but  tempora- 
rily, and  Palestine  for  a  short  period.     In  size,  therefore, 

1  Translations  and  Reprints,  iii.,  No.  6. 

2  See  Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  for  best  discussion  of  this  institution, 
a  See  Acts.  xix.  19,  for  Biblical  authority. 

*  Putnam,  Censorship  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  i.,  58-61. 
* Ibid.,  64-67. 


574     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


it  surpassed  the  old  Roman  Empire  at  its  greatest 
height.  The  boundary  lines  of  this  great  papal 
Empire  were  widened  still  further  by  the  zealous 
missionary  work  encouraged  by  the  Supreme  Pontiff  in 
Europe  among  the  Slavs,  Prussians,  Finns,  and  Moham- 
medans in  Sicily  and  Spain;  in  Asia  among  the  Tartars, 
Mongols,  and  Moslems ;  in  Africa  among  the  Mohamme- 
dans1; in  America  among  the  inhabitants  of  Iceland, 
Greenland,  and  "Vineland" — possibly  even  on  the 
New  England  coast.  These  fruitful  labours  were  con- 
ducted chiefly  by  the  Franciscans  and  the  Dominicans. 
The  wealth  of  the  Church  at  this  time  consisted  of 
lands  and  buildings;  Church  furniture,  utensils,  and 
ornaments;  and  money  derived  from  Church  lands, 
the  sale  of  privileges,  the  gifts  of  the  pious,  tithes,  and 
the  fees  for  various  kinds  of  religious  service.  In  the 
United  States  churches  must  rely  wholly  upon  volun- 
tary support.  It  was  not  so  with  the  mediaeval 
Church.  The  tithes  were  regular  taxes  and  those 
persons  upon  whom  they  were  levied  had  to  pay  them 
just  as  taxes  imposed  by  governments  must  be  paid 
to-day.  Wide-spread  complaint  came  from  both  clergy 
and  laity  that  these  taxes  were  unjust.  The  Church 
actually  owned  about  one  third  of  Germany,  nearly 
one  fifth  of  France,  the  greater  part  of  Italy,  a  large 
section  of  Christian  Spain,  a  big  portion  of  England, 
perhaps  one  third,  and  important  regions  in  Scandi- 
navia, Poland,  and  Hungary.  The  papal  states  in 
Italy,  running  diagonally  across  the  peninsula,  were 
ruled  by  the  Pope  as  a  temporal  prince.  These  exten- 
sive territorial  possessions  together  with  the  great 
wealth  made  the  Church  the  mightiest  secular  power 

»  Neander,  iv.,  1-82;  Kurtz,  i.,  120-138. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   575 


in  the  world  and  put  into  the  hands  of  the  Church 
thousands  of  lucrative  sinecures,  coveted  and  too 
often  secured  by  persons  wholly  unfitted  for  the  spiritual 
functions  of  the  office.  Through  these  extensive 
possessions  the  Church  was  beyond  all  question  the 
greatest  economic  and  industrial  power  in  Europe. 
The  Church  was  led  to  adopt  feudalism  and  thus  the 
Pope  became  the  most  powerful  feudal  overlord  in 
Europe.  Furthermore,  the  Church,  because  of  its  vast 
domains  and  enormous  income,  was  enabled  to  support 
itself  by  its  own  perpetual  wealth.  In  consequence 
many  evils  and  abuses  sprang  up,1  or  were  introduced, 
which  led  to  the  decline  of  the  Church  and  the  numerous 
demands  for  reformation.  It  must  be  said,  however, 
to  the  credit  of  the  Church  that  these  resources  were 
used  to  excellent  advantage  in  furthering  charity  of  all 
sorts  and  in  caring  for  the  poor  and  unfortunate. 

During  this  period  the  organisation  of  the  papal 
hierarchy  was  perfected.  At  the  head  stood  the  all- 
powerful  and  absolute  Pope  as  God's  agent  on  earth; 
hence,  at  least  in  theory  and  claim,  he  was  the  ruler  of 
the  whole  world  in  temporal  and  spiritual  affairs.  He 
was  the  defender  of  Christianity,  the  Church,  and  the 
clergy  in  all  respects.  He  was  the  supreme  censor  of 
morals  in  Christendom  and  the  head  of  a  great  spiritual 
despotism.  He  was  the  source  of  all  earthly  justice  and 
the  final  court  of  appeal  in  all  cases.  Any  person, 
whether  priest  or  layman,  could  appeal  to  him  at  any 
stage  in  the  trial  of  a  great  many  important  cases. 
He  was  the  supreme  lawgiver  on  earth,  hence  he  called 
all  councils  and  confirmed  or  rejected  their  decrees. 

1  In  this  century  it  became  customary  for  Popes  to  fill  many 
benefices  themselves  and  to  receive  all  or  half  of  the  first  year's 
income  from  those  appointed. 


576     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


He  might,  if  he  so  wished,  set  aside  any  law  of  the 
Church,  no  matter  how  ancient,  so  long  as  it  was  not 
directly  ordained  by  the  Bible  or  by  nature.  He  could 
also  make  exceptions  to  purely  human  laws  and  these 
exceptions  were  known  as  dispensations.1  He  had 
the  sole  authority  to  transfer  or  depose  bishops  and  other 
Church  officers.  He  was  the  creator  of  cardinals  and 
ecclesiastical  honours  of  all  kinds.  He  was  the  exclusive 
possessor  of  the  universal  right  of  absolution,  dispen- 
sation, and  canonisation.  He  was  the  grantor  of  all 
Church  benefices.  He  was  the  superintendent  of  the 
whole  financial  system  of  the  Church  and  of  all  taxes. 
He  had  control  over  the  whole  force  of  the  clergy  in 
Christendom,  because  he  conferred  the  pallium,2  the 
archbishop's  badge  of  office.  In  his  hands  were  kept 
the  terrible  thunders  of  the  Church  to  enforce  obedi- 
ence to  papal  law,  namely,  excommunication  and  the 
interdict. 

Excommunication  meant  for  a  private  person  that 
he  was  a  social  outcast,  excluded  from  all  legal  pro- 
tection and  deprived  of  the  sacraments  which  were 
"the  life  blood  of  the  man  of  the  Middle  Ages."  His 
property  might  be  confiscated  without  the  possibility 
of  recovery.  Death  and  hell  wTere  sure  to  be  his 
doom  if  repentance  and  absolution  did  not  occur. 
And  these  same  terrible  results  might  even  be  extended 
to  his  descendants.  Excommunication  for  a  king 
meant,  in  addition  to  the  same  treatment  as  a  private 
individual,  the  deprivation  of  all  authority  and  the 
absolution   of  subjects  from  all  obedience.     Excom- 

1  Examples:  permit  to  cousins  to  marry;  release  of  a  monk  from 
his  vow. 

2  This  is  a  narrow  woollen  scarf  made  by  the  nuns  of  St.  Agnes 
in  Rome. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    577 


munication  was  the  greatest  moral  power  in  all  history 
and  effective  simply  because  the  Christian  opinion  of 
the  age  responded  to  it  and  enforced  it.  By  its  use  the 
Pope  subjected  to  his  will  such  powerful  personages  as 
Henry  IV.  of  Germany,  Henry  II.  of  England,  Philip 
(IV.)  Augustus  of  France,  Frederick  II.  of  Germany, 
John  of  England,  and  countless  lesser  persons  all  over 
Christendom.1  The  power  of  excommunication  was 
exercised  by  the  Pope  for  the  whole  Church,  by  the 
bishop  for  his  diocese,  and  even  by  subordinate  Church 
officials.  The  formula  and  ceremony  for  excommuni- 
cation were  not  uniform  either  in  time  or  place  but 
varied  greatly.2 

The  interdict  was  directed  against  a  city,  a  region, 
or  a  kingdom.  It  was  used  for  the  purpose  of  forcing 
a  city  or  a  ruler  to  obedience,  as  for  example  the  inter- 
dict laid  on  Rome  in  1 155,  and  that  on  England,  which 
lasted  six  years  three  months  and  fourteen  days,  to 
subdue  the  obstinate  King  John ;  or  to  enforce  the  ban 
of  excommunication  3 ;  or  to  collect  debts  4 ;  or  to  wreak 
vengeance  for  the  death  or  maltreatment  of  a  son  of  the 
Church. 5  The  interdict  was  proclaimed  in  a  papal 
bull  and  read  by  the  clergy  of  the  region  affected  to  the 
congregations  every  Sunday  for  some  weeks  before  it 
went  into  operation.  Then  all  religious  rites  and 
sacraments  ceased  except  baptism,  confession,  and 
the  viaticum. 6  All  the  faithful  were  ordered  to  dress 
like  penitents  and  to  pray  for  the  removal  of  the  cause 

1  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  235-286. 

2  The  ceremony  of  bell,  book,  and  candle  was  the  most  common. 

3  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  395,  397,  403,  4°4,  4°5,  412. 

4  Ibid.,  442,  448. 

5  Ibid.,  384,  463. 

6  Matth.  Paris,  Hist.  Ma].,  an.  1208,  1214. 

37 


578     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


of  the  curse.  Thus  the  interdict  resembled  a  raging 
pestilence  and  made  a  deep  impression  on  the  igno- 
rant masses.  It  practically  stopped  all  civil  govern- 
ment, for  the  courts  of  justice  were  closed,  wills  could 
not  be  made,  and  public  officials  of  all  kinds  were  for-v 
bidden  to  act.  Naturally  it  led  to  many  very  super- 
stitious tales.  For  instance,  the  valley  of  Aspe  in 
Beam  was  cursed  for  seven  years  and  during  that 
time  it  was  said  that  women  bore  no  children,  cattle 
gave  no  increase,  and  the  land  produced  no  crops  or 
fruit.1 

The  use  of  such  powerful  weapons  as  excommuni- 
cation and  interdict  was  soon  greatly  abused.  Popes 
and  bishops  employed  this  power  out  of  spite,  or  hatred 
or  for  ambitious  ends.2  Scheming  rulers  enlisted 
papal,  or  episcopal,  help  of  this  sort  to  humble  political 
rivals  and  for  purely  secular  ends  such  as  enforcing  laws 
and  collecting  obligations. 3  In  fact  so  wide-spread 
was  the  employment  of  these  powers  that  by  the  four- 
teenth century  half  of  the  Christians  in  Europe  were 
under  the  ban.4  It  was  taught,  moreover,  that  how- 
ever illicit  or  apparently  unfair  or  unwarranted,  still  the 
ecclesiastical  mandates  were  to  be  obeyed.  Hence 
Popes  even  granted  the  right  not  to  be  excommunicated 
without  good  cause. s  Before  long  these  religious  curses 
degenerated  to  the  point  where  they  were  applied  to 
animals  and  inanimate  objects,  of  which  there  are  many 
illustrations.  For  instance  two  of  St.  Bernard's  monks 
cursed  the  vineyard  of  a  rival  monk  and  it  became 

>  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  427. 
2  Ibid.,  417,  419,  420-421,  etc. 
s  Ibid.,  440. 
*  Ibid.,  417. 
s  Ibid.,  418. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   579 


sterile  until  St.  Bernard  himself  removed  the  blight.1 
A  certain  priest,  noticing  that  the  fruit  of  a  neigh- 
bouring orchard  had  a  stronger  attraction  for  the 
children  of  his  congregation  than  the  divine  service, 
excommunicated  the  orchard,  whereupon  it  remained 
barren  until  the  ban  was  taken  off.2  At  the  request 
of  the  farmers,  the  Bishop  of  Comminges  cursed  the 
weeds  in  their  fields  with  the  desired  result.3  St. 
Bernard,  however,  capped  the  climax  of  these  absurdi- 
ties when  he  solemnly  excommunicated  the  devil.* 
After  the  thirteenth  century  the  same  weapons  were 
used  against  leeches,  rats,  grasshoppers,  snails,  bugs, 
and  pests  of  all  kinds.  In  fact  as  late  as  1648  a  similar 
formula  was  given  based  on  the  forty-ninth  psalm 
and  the  eleventh  chapter  of  Luke. s 

The  efficacy  of  excommunication  was  likewise 
brought  into  service  to  protect  property.  For  instance 
the  Archbishop  of  Campostella  in  the  twelfth  century 
excommunicated  any  one  who  should  steal  or  mutilate 
the  manuscript  history  of  his  diocese.  The  Abbot  of 
Sens  in  11 23  cursed  on  his  death-bed  any  successor 
who  should  sell,  lend,  or  lose  any  of  the  twenty  volumes 
in  the  abbey  library.  Clement  III.  encouraged  Bologna 
University  by  anathematising  any  person  who  should 
offer  a  higher  rent  for  rooms  used  by  students  or  teachers. 
Later,  copyrights  were  protected  by  the  same  power 
and  stolen  property  was  recovered. 6  Letters  bestowing 
the  power  of  excommunication  were  soon  purchased 
and  used  for  all  sorts  of  mercenary  purposes.7     John 

1  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  427. 

2  Ibid.,  428;  Agnel,  Curiosites  Judiciaires  du  Moyen-Age,  26. 

5  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  428.  *  Ibid.,  429. 

5  Ibid.,  433.      See  Translations  and  Reprints,  iv.,  No.  4. 

6  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  435-437. 

•  Ibid.,  451 ;  see  Letter  of  Innocent  III.  in  Regest.,  lib.  x.,  ep.  79. 


580     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Gerson  of  the  University  of  Paris  denounced  Pope 
Martin  V.  for  saying  that  as  Pope  he  congratulated 
himself  because  he  was  no  longer  in  danger  of  excom- 
munication.1 Gradually  there  came  to  be  drawn  up 
a  list  of  no  less  than  one  hundred  sins  which  were 
ipso  facto  followed  by  excommunication.  Many  of 
these  are  of  the  most  trifling  character,  like  that  of 
collecting  toll  from  a  priest  on  crossing  a  bridge.2 
But  this  evil  was  offset  by  the  ease  with  which  one 
could  purchase  absolution. 

The  papal  court,  or  curia,  by  the  thirteenth  century 
included  an  enormous  number  of  persons  both  secular 
and  ecclesiastic  with  all  kinds  of  duties.  The  financial 
section  was  in  many  ways  the  most  important  one.3 
All  members  of  the  curia,  which  resembled  the  court 
of  an  Emperor,  were  directly  responsible  to  the  Pope. 
The  cardinals  were  the  most  dignified  and  powerful 
members.  Papal  legates  from  the  court  swarmed 
over  all  Europe  commissioned  with  unlimited  authority 
to  execute  papal  commands  and  to  uphold  papal  claims. 
They  ranged  from  primates  to  petty  priests  and  monks, 
were  directly  subject  to  the  Pope,  and  were  feared 
and  hated  by  the  clergy  and  laity  alike. 

The  College  of  Cardinals  created  in  1059  had  come 
to  play  a  marked  role  in  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  addition 
to  their  original  duties.  Their  office  ranked  next  to 
that  of  the  Pope  and  they  were  called  the  ' '  Holy  and 
Sacred  College."  Foreigners  were  first  appointed  as 
cardinals  in  the  thirteenth  century.  A  distinct  dress 
was  assumed.  The  red  hat  was  given  by  Innocent 
IV.  (1245) ;  the  purple  robe  was  bestowed  by  Boniface 

>  Lea,  Stud,  in  Ch.  Hist.,  455. 

2  Ibid.,  457- 

»  Waker,  Kirchliches  Finanzwesen  der  Pdpste. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   581 


VIII.   (1297);  the  white  horse,  red  cover,  and  golden 
bridle  were  added  by  Paul  II.  (1464) 
"Eminence"  was    created    by    Urban  6^0). 

These  cardinals  were  shrewd  politicians  t6x  the  most 
part  and  hence  divided  into  Frencl  man,  and  Ital- 

ian parties.  They  secured  their  appointments  ofttimes 
through  favouritism  or  nepotism  hence  were  not 
always  men  of  the  most  sterling  worth.  As  members 
of  the  papal  court  they  lived  at  Rome  and  were  supposed 
to  be  occupied  with  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  the  capital 
or  busy  on  important  diplomatic  missions.  They  were 
easily  won  away,  however,  from  their  lofty  duties 
by  secular  princes  and  became  involved  in  all  sorts 
of  questionable  intrigues.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  surprise, 
therefore,  to  find  the  best  men  of  the  day  like  Dante 
and  Petrarch  denouncing  them  in  unmeasured  terms. 
Below  the  cardinals  ir  the  hierarchy  came  the 
metropolitans,  archbishops,  and  primates.  The  arch- 
bishops were  the  most  numerous  but  the  lowest  in  rank. 
The  metropolitans  ranked  next  and  were  found  in  the 
great  cities.  The  primates  had  the  highest  rank  but 
were  comparatively  few.  It  is  doubtful  whether  alto- 
gether the  archbishops  in  the  thirteenth  century 
numbered  more  than  twenty-five.  The  primates,  who 
had  charge  in  a  general  way  of  what  might  be  called 
the  national  churches,  confirmed  the  election  of  bishops 
and  archbishops  in  their  dioceses,  called  and  presided 
over  national  synods,  held  the  superior  ecclesiastical 
courts,  performed  the  coronation  ceremonies  of  kings 
and  queens,  and  had  general  control  of  their  districts. 
The  archbishops  ruled  over  a  distinct  province  including 
several  bishops,  whose  election  and  consecration  they 
superintended,  called  and  presided  over  provincial 
synods,   inflicted   censures   and   punishments   on   the 


582     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


ishops  for  breaches  of  discipline,  acted  as  court  of 
appeal  above  the  episcopal  courts,  and  exercised  general 
oversight  concerning  all  Church  affairs  of  the  districts. 
The  metropolitans,  whose  historical  significance  was 
practically  lost  by  the  thirteenth  century,  had  essen- 
tially the  same  office  as  that  of  archbishop.  Under 
the  leadership  of  the  higher  ecclesiastics  there  was  a 
tendency  to  form  national  churches.  The  primates 
and  archbishops  defended  these  national  churches 
even  against  the  Pope  and  frequently  sided  with  the 
kings  against  the  supreme  Pontiffs.  In  Germany 
they  helped  elect  the  Emperor,  played  an  important 
political  role,  and  saved  Germany  from  ruin  again  and 
again.1  In  France  and  England  they  were  the 
trusted  counsellors  and  advisers  of  the  sovereign. 
Almost  without  exception  they  came  from  the  nobility 
and  were  large  landed  proprietors  as  well  as  secular 
rulers. 

The  bishops,  who  came  next  in  the  scale  of  the  hier- 
archy, were  elected  originally  by  the  people  and  the 
clergy  but  that  right  was  gradually  usurped  by  the 
metropolitans  and  the  secular  rulers.  The  mitre  and 
crosier  were  the  emblems  of  the  episcopal  office.  The 
Concordat  of  Worms  in  1.122  settled  long  disputes 
by  giving  both  Pope  and  ruler  a  share  in  the  election. 
By  the  thirteenth  century,  however,  the  Pope  had 
come  to  have  the  upper  hand  in  these  ecclesiastical 
preferments.  The  total  number  of  bishops  in  the 
thirteenth  century  was  approximately  700. 2  The 
duties  of  the  bishop  were  both  spiritual  and  temporal. 
His  office  was  one  of  the  most  important  in  the  mediaeval 

1  Kurtz,  i.,  166. 

2  Gams,  Series  Episcoporum  Ecclesice  Catholicae;  Lea,  Stud,  in 
Ch.  Hist.,  61-109. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    583 


Church.  He  ruled  over  a  diocese  of  any  number  of 
parish  churches,  but  had  his  own  especial  church, 
which  was  called  the  cathedral,  and  usually  surpassed 
all  other  churches  of  the  diocese  in  size  and  beauty.  He 
saw  to  it  that  public  services  were  conducted  in  the 
proper  manner.  He  overlooked  the  administration  of 
charity.  He  tried  to  secure  efficient  subordinates  who 
would  fulfil  all  their  duties,  and  he  alone  could  ordain 
new  priests  or  degrade  the  old.  He  enforced  discipline 
and  canon  law.  He  exercised  the  rights  of  confirmation 
and  holy  orders,  and  consecrated  res  sacra  like  churches 
and  shrines.  He  usually  supervised  the  monastic 
houses  in  his  diocese.1  And  he  himself  conducted 
religious  services  of  a  special  character  in  his  cathedral 
or  domus  dei.  He  assumed  judicial  power  over  his 
clergy  and  in  case  of  misbehaviour  punished  them  by 
deposition  or  confinement  in  a  cloister.  He  passed  judg- 
ment on  all  questions  of  marriage,  wills,  oaths,  usury, 
and  similar  subjects.  In  general  each  bishop,  under 
the  authority  of  the  representative  of  St.  Peter,  was 
a  little  pope  over  that  section  of  the  Church  which 
was  under  his  jurisdiction2  and  he  was  regarded  as  the 
direct  successor  of  the  Apostles.  On  the  temporal 
side  the  bishop  was  a  landlord,  governed  a  large 
estate,  and  performed  those  governmental  duties 
which  the  king,  particularly  in  Germany,  thrust  upon 
him.  He  did  not  own  the  land,  but  only  used  it.  He 
himself  was  often  a  vassal,  had  a  large  number  of 
vassals  and  sub-vassals  under  him,  collected  feudal 
dues  from  his  inferiors,  paid  feudal  tributes  to  his 
superiors,  and  was  an  integral  part  of  the  feudal  system. 

1  Some  •monasteries  secured  papal  exemption  from  episcopal 
control. 

2  Froude,  Short  Stories  of  Great  Subjects,  54 


584     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

His  installation  to  office  was  invariably  accompanied 
by  the  ceremony  of  feudal  investiture.  Indeed  from 
many  standpoints  he  was  more  of  a  feudal  lord  than  a 
churchman.  It  is  easy  to  see,  therefore,  what  a  power- 
ful factor  the  bishop  was  in  both  secular  and  ecclesiasti- 
cal affairs,  and  how  sweeping  was  his  influence. 

There  were  several  deviations  from  the  regular  office 
of  bishop.  The  chor-bishop  or  "  country  bishop,"  who 
was  little  more  than  an  assistant  of  the  city  bishop,  had 
gradually  died  out  by  the  thirteenth  century.1  The 
honorary  bishop,  or  titular  bishop,  a  title  first  applied 
to  missionary  bishops,  still  existed  in  Europe  but  with 
no  regular  diocese.  The  progress  of  Mohammedanism 
drove  many  regular  bishops  away  from  their  episcopal 
seats  in  Asia,  Africa,  and  Spain.  But  they  were  allowed 
to  retain  their  titles  and  functions  even  though  deprived 
of  their  dioceses,  and  successors  were  regularly  elected. 
Again  during  the  Crusades  many  bishoprics  were  estab- 
lished in  the  East.  Through  the  failure  of  the  Crusades, 
however,  these  bishops  lost  their  dioceses,  but  they  too 
were  permitted  to  retain  their  titles  in  the  hope  of 
eventually  recovering  their  possessions.  They  like- 
wise served  as  assistants  to  bishops  in  western  Europe 
and  their  successors  were  regularly  appointed  by  the 
Pope.  They  became  very  independent  and  often 
caused  the  regular  bishops  much  trouble.  Efforts  were 
made  later  to  get  rid  of  them  but  without  success. 

Connected  with  each  bishop's  cathedral  was  a  chap- 
ter which  probably  grew  out  of  the  original  college 
of  presbyters  who  assisted  the  bishop  in  his  spiritual 
and  secular  duties.     As  time  passed  and  the  Church 

'  Smith  and  Cheetham,  Diet.  Chr.  Antiq.,  i.,  353,  355;  Cath. 
Encyc. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    585 

grew  these  presbyters  came  to  be  attached  to  the 
cathedral  as  a  distinct  body  of  the  clergy.  By  the 
ninth  century  these  clergy  came  to  be  known  as  a 
chapter  and  consisted  of  either  the  "seculars,"  i.e.,  the 
clergy  not  bound  by  monastic  vows  and  living  in  separate 
houses,  or  the  "regulars,"  i.e.,  the  clergy  living  as  monks 
in  a  common  building.  Thus  the  chapter  came  to  have 
a  regular  organisation  with  officers  whose  duties  were 
more  or  less  clearly  defined.  At  the  head  stood  the 
bishop ;  then  the  dean,  the  real  acting  head ;  and  after 
him  the  precentor,  or  chanter,  who  was  a  musical 
director ;  the  chancellor,  who  had  charge  of  the  education 
of  younger  members,  the  library,  correspondence,  and 
the  delivery  of  lectures  and  sermons;  the  treasurer^, 
who  was  responsible  for  the  funds  of  the  church,  the 
sacred  vessels,  the  altar  furniture,  and  the  reliquaries; 
the  sub-dean,  the  sub-chanter,  and  vice-chancellor; 
and  the  archdeacons,  whose  number  depended  on  the 
size  of  the  diocese,  who  executed  episcopal  orders,  who 
acted  as  inspectors  and  had  minor  judicial  functions, 
and  who  became  so  independent  and  powerful  that  the 
office  was  abolished  in  the  twelfth  century.1  The 
remaining  members  of  the  chapter  were  called  canons 
or  prebendaries.  During  the  absence  of  the  canons 
their  duties  were  performed  by  substitutes  called 
vicars. 

Each  chapter  had  its  own  laws,  endowments,  fees, 
revenues,  and  jurisdiction  over  lands.  The  chapters 
often  came  into  open  conflict  with  the  bishops2  and 
tended  to  form  alliances  with  Popes  and  rulers  against 
the    episcopal    authorities.     It   was    not   uncommon, 

1  Kurtz,  vol.  i.,  168.  See  Howson,  Essay  on  Cathedrals;  Free- 
man, Cathedral  Church  of  Wells;  Walcott,  Cathedralia. 

2  Emerton,  Med.  Europe,  549.    . 


586     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


either,  to  find  chapters  practically  i  independent  of  the 
bishops  with  members  appointed  directly  by  the  Pope. 
These  bodies  exercised  great  powers — they  called  coun- 
cils, they  tried  clerical  cases,  they  even  excommunicated, 
and  as  little  Colleges  of  Cardinals,  usually  at  the 
king's  suggestion,  elected  bishops.1  Membership  in  a 
chapter  was  regarded  as  a  fat  berth  and  hence  eagerly 
sought  by  leading  families  of  nobility. 

At  the  bottom  of  the  hierarchical  scale  stood  the 
priests  who  presided  over  the  parishes,  which  were 
divided  into  city,  village,  and  rural  parishes,  and 
were  the  lowest  divisions  of  the  Church.  As  a  rule  a 
parish  contained  at  least  ten  families  and  varied  from 
that  to  a  considerable  village,  or  a  large  section  of 
a  town.  The  appointment  of  the  priests  was  made 
by  the  "Patron"  of  the  parochial  church,  i.e.,  the 
person  who  owned  the  church  property,  whether  a 
layman  or  a  clerical  person.  The  appointee  was 
confirmed  by  the  bishop.  Churches  were  thus  fre- 
quently handed  about  from  one  owner  to  another  like 
any  feudal  property  and  consequently  the  tendency 
was  to  secularise  the  priests  as  well  as  the  higher  clergy. 
Seeing  this  evil  the  monastic  orders  sought  to  reform 
the  abuse  by  bringing  priests  under  their  control.  The 
income  of  the  priest  was  derived  from  lands  belonging 
to  the  parish  church,  fromtithes,and  from  contributions, 
but  as  a  rule  it  was  scarcely  more  than  enough  to  meet 
his  scanty  needs.2  The  priest  was  the  only  Church 
officer  who  came  continually  into  direct  touch  with  the 
masses  of  the  people  and,  consequently,  he  it  was  who 
really  controlled  the  destiny  of  both  their  bodies  and 

i  This  power  had  been  given  to  them  in  the  reforms  of  Gregory 
VII. 

2  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  361. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   587 


souls.  In  addition  to  conducting  the  regular  services, 
he  could  administer  or  withhold  the  sacraments  so 
necessary  to  salvation,  and  hence  the  destiny  of  all 
men  rested  in  his  hands.  He  absolved,  baptised,  mar- 
ried, and  buried  his  parishioners.  He  monopolised  the 
auricular  confession  and  through  it  regulated  the  con- 
science, determined  conduct,  and  cured  the  soul  of  sin. 
If  advice  and  penance  failed  to  keep  the  incorrigible 
sinner  in  the  path  of  righteousness,  his  case  could 
be  carried  to  the  spiritual  court  of  the  bishop,  who  had 
practically  unlimited  power.  Each  priest  had  not 
only  certain  duties  to  perform,  but  also  possessed  dis- 
tinct rights  and  privileges,  and  a  supernatural  character 
which  put  him  and  his  property  above  the  common 
level  of  humanity.  No  longer  a  citizen  of  a  state,  the 
Church  was  his  country,  his  home,  and  his  family.  No 
matter  what  crime  he  committed,  the  secular  power 
could  not  arrest  him — only  a  religious  tribunal  could 
try  him  and  such  bodies  never  shed  human  blood. 
Hence  punishments  for  misdemeanours  were  com- 
paratively light. 

The  parish  church  was  the  unit  of  mediaeval  civil- 
isation and  the  priest  was  looked  up  to  as  the  natural 
guardian  of  the  community.  He  cared  for  both  the 
souls  and  bodies  of  his  flock.  In  addition  to  using 
every  agency  to  induce  his  members  to  lead  godly 
lives,  it  was  his  business  to  see  that  no  dangerous 
characters  lurked  in  the  villages — heretics,  sorcerers, 
or  lepers. 

The  clergy  were  separated  from  the  laity  by  a 
very  pronounced  differentiation.  The  sacred  character 
imparted  to  the  priesthood  by  the  sacrament  of 
ordination,  the  holy  calling  of  the  man  of  God  who 
held  in  his  hands  the  power  of  spiritual  life  and  death, 


588     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


and  the  enforcement  of  the  canon  of  celibacy  after  a 
bitter  struggle  of  more  than  a  century,  all  tended  to 
emphasise  and   magnify  the  wide  gulf   between  the 
clergy   and   the   laymen.     The   sacerdotal   office   was 
most    highly    respected    as    the     certain    avenue    to 
social  service,  to  fame,  and  to  honour.    It  is  no  surprise, 
therefore,  to  see  men  of  all  ranks  entering  the  ministry 
of  the  Church.     For  those  of  humble  birth,  the  oppor- 
tunity  thus   offered -was   about   the   only   means   of 
promotion  in  Europe.     Once  in  the  Church,  talent  and 
energy  could  always  overcome  lowly  origin,  and  attain 
elevation  to  a  high  place.   The  annals  of  the  hierarchy 
are  full  of  the  examples  of  those  who  rose  from  the 
meanest  social  ranks  to  the  most  commanding  positions. 
Many  of  the  greatest  and  best  Popes  had  that  ex- 
perience.1    Thus  the  Church  constantly  recruited  its 
ranks  with  vigorous  fresh  blood.     Not  even  the  lot 
of  the  prince  was  envied  by  the  priest.    "  Princes,"  as- 
serted John  of  Salisbury,  "derive  their  power  from  the 
Church,  and  are  servants  of  the  priesthood."    Honori- 
usof  Autun  wrote,  "The  least  of  the  priestly  order  is 
worthier  than  any  king."     A  great  thing  it  truly  was 
for  the  future  of  Europe  that  in  those  rough  ages  there 
existed  a  moral  force  superior  to  noble  descent,  to  blue 
blood,  and  to  martial  prowess  to  point  out  the  correct 
path,  to  uphold  right,  and  to  sanction  eternal  justice. 

The  corpus  juris  canonici,  or  canon  law,  which  regu- 
lated all  the  workings  of  the  hierarchy,  included  all  the 
rules  enacted  by  the  Church  for  its  relation  with  the 
secular  power,  for  its  own  internal  administration,  and 
for  the  duties  and  conduct  of  its  members.     It  differed 

»  Urban  II.,  Adrian  IV.,  Alexander  V.,  Gregory  VII.,  Benedict 
XII.,  Nicholas  V.,  Sixtus  IV.,  Urban  IV.,  John  XXII.,  Sixtus  V., 
were  among  the  many  Popes  of  humble  ancestry. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   589 


from  the  jus  ecclesiasticum,  or  ecclesiastical  law,  in 
having  the  Church  for  its  source,  while  the  latter  had 
the  Church  for  its  subject.  The  Pseudo-Isidorian  De- 
cretals continued  to  be  the  constitution  of  the  Church. 
Various  commentaries,  all  based  upon  the  Decretals 
as  the  chief  repertory,  were  made  by  prominent 
churchmen.  *  Gratian,  a  Camaldolensian  monk,  a 
professor  in  Bologna  University,  in  1250  first  taught 
canon  law  as  a  distinct  and  complete  system  like 
Roman  law.  He  published  the  Decretum  Gratiani,  a 
scientific  digest  of  all  canon  laws,  which  soon  super- 
seded all  other  codifications  and  became  the  basis  for 
many  later  commentaries.2  Canon  law  was  studied  in 
all  the  mediaeval  universities.  Regular  faculties  of 
canon  law  were  established,  which  granted  the  degree 
of  doctores  decretorum  after  a  course  of  six  years'  study. 
It  was  not  long,  therefore,  until  the  Church  was  given 
a  class  of  keen,  well-drilled  lawyers  who  gradually 
extended  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  over  all  religious 
duties;  over  baptisms,  marriages,  and  deaths,  and  hence 
over  legitimacy  and  succession;  over  all  persons  under 
religious  vows,  and  consequently  over  the  clergy,  cru- 
saders, widows,  orphans,  and  minors;  over  heresy, 
blasphemy,  and  sacrilege;  and  over  adultery,  bigamy, 
fraud,  and  perjury.  The  canon  law  of  the  Church 
must  also  be  given  credit  for  laying  the  foundation 
for  international  law  and  serving  as  a  model  for 
constitutional  law. 

The  papal  penitentiary,  or  court,  grounded  on  the 

1  Anselm  of  Milan  (9th  cent.),  Regino  of  Prum  (10th  cent.), 
Burchard  of  Worms  (nth  cent.),  Ivo  of  Chartres  (12th  cent.),  and 
Algerius  of  Liege  (1120). 

2  The  best  edition  is  by  Richter.  Unfortunately  there  is  no 
English  translation. 


59°     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


"power  of  the  keys,"  possessed  original  and  appellate 
powers  of  first  instance  and  last  resort.  It  originated 
in  12 15  at  Rome  and  consisted  of  a  body  of  canonists 
and  theologians  who  acted  as  a  unit  under  powers 
granted  by  the  Pope.1  It  attempted  to  decide  all  cases 
of  morals  and  discipline,  oftentimes  in  virtual  ignorance 
of  the  facts.  During  the  thirteenth  century  peniten- 
tiaries were  appointed  in  every  bishopric  to  take 
cognisance  of  cases.  Thus  the  eagle  eyes  of  the  supreme 
court  of  Rome  were  fastened  on  every  breach  of  law 
throughout  Christendom.  Naturally  many  abuses  were 
connected  with  such  a  system.  In  1022  the  Council 
of  Seligenstadt  complained  that  Rome  had  extended 
her  jurisdiction  even  over  the  laity.2  Through  local 
representatives  the  papal  penitentiary  practically 
nullified  the  discipline  of  bishops  and  granted  virtual  im- 
munity to  offenders.  Venality  was  an  accompanying 
evil  from  the  beginning.  Absolution  could  easily 
be  secured  by  the  rich  and  influential  and  dispensations 
were  sold  for  money.  Of  course  this  condition  pro- 
duced disastrous  effects  on  morals.  "Rome  was  a 
fountain  of  pardon  for  all  infractions  of  the  decalogue." 
Bishop  Grosseteste  declared  about  1250  that  the  low 
morality  of  the  priesthood  was  due  to  this  system. 
Pardon  was  granted  to  both  sides  of  the  controversy. 
A  priest  stole  a  book  from  his  own  church,  pawned  it  for 
money,  and  then  excommunicated  the  unknown  thief. 
He  was  discovered  but  pardoned  on  the  ground  that 
he  could  not  interdict  himself.  Monks  and  nuns 
bought  their  way  into  convents  and  then  purchased 
absolution  for  the  act. 


1  Lea,  Formulary  of  the  Papal  Penitentiary,  xxxi.  to  xxxv. 

2  Ibid. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    591 


By  the  thirteenth  century  the  Roman  ritual  in 
the  Latin  language  was  practically  in  universal  use. 
The  Slavish  liturgy  had  disappeared  and  in  Spain 
alone  the  old  national  liturgy  still  lingered,  though 
even  there  the  Roman  ritual  was  permitted.  Latin 
had  become  the  general  official  language  of  the  Church. 
But  it  was  not  uncommon  to  give  in  the  vernacular, 
besides  the  regular  announcements,  the  confession  of 
faith,  the  confession  of  sin  with  the  general  absolution, 
intercessions  for  the  living  and  the  dead,  and  the 
Lord's  Prayer. 

At  this  period  of  the  Church's  greatest  power  there 
was  a  noticeable  revival  of  preaching  caused  by  the 
monastic  reformers  like  the  Clugniacs,  Cistercians, 
Dominicans,  and  Franciscans  who  earnestly  preached 
repentance,  and  also  by  the  tremendous  crusading 
enthusiasm.  All  the  heroes  of  monasticism,  scholasti- 
cism, and  the  papal  hierarchy  were  forceful  preachers.1 
To  accommodate  these  preachers  pulpits  were  built 
against  a  pillar  or  in  a  corner  of  a  nave.  To  the 
masses  on  popular  occasions,  and  even  in  the  regular 
services,  they  spoke  in  the  vernacular,  but  all  stately 
addresses  in  synods  and  councils  were  delivered  in  the 
speech  of  Rome.  Popes  and  councils  urged  the  im- 
portance of  rearing  a  race  of  learned  clergy  who  could 
give  the  Church  intelligent  leadership.  The  synod 
of  Treves  in  1221  went  so  far  as  to  forbid  uneducated 
and  inexperienced  priests  to  preach,  because  it  caused 
more  harm  than  good.  As  a  result  of  this  wide-spread 
preaching  the  Church  was  given  a  unity  of  doctrine  and 
feeling  which  it  had  not  enjoyed  before. 

>  One  of  the  most  famous  preachers  of  the  13th  century  was 
the  German  Franciscan,  Berthold  of  Regensburg  (d.  1272),  who 
often  preached  to  crowds  numbering  100,000. 


592     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


The  number  of  sacraments  was  generally  recognised 
by  the  thirteenth  century  as  seven.1     Peter  Lombard's 
Sentences  first   outlined   them   and   Thomas   Aquinas 
(d.  1274)  practically  established  them,  although  they 
were  not  officially  adopted  until  the  Council  of  Florence 
in  1439.  Theoretically  the  sacraments  were   believed 
to  confer  grace,  "the  fulness  of  divine  life,"  upon  the 
recipients  and  to  make  them  different  persons  with  new 
characters.     This  change  was  produced  by  God  through 
the  Church  and  was  based  upon  the  idea  that  this 
life  should  be  consecrated  and  sanctified  by  religion 
in  all  its  various  relations.     Hence  baptism  suggested 
birth  to  a  new  spiritual  life  free  from  the  sin  due  to 
Adam's  fall;  the  Lord's  Supper  gave  nutriment  to  pre- 
serve life  and  strength;  penance  indicated  a  recovery 
to  health  after  sickness  incident  to  sin;  confirmation 
marked  the    growth  of    righteous    life   to    maturity; 
extreme  unction  suggested  diet  and-  exercise  in  con- 
valescence and  purified  and  refreshed  the  spirit  of  the 
dying;  ordination  marked  a  promotion  to  a  higher  con- 
secrated life  and  to  new  duties ;  and  marriage  meant  the 
assumption  of  new  social  relations  which  could  never 
be  severed.     The  Church  held  that  all  these  sacraments 
were  instituted  by  Jesus  and  used  by  him  personally, 
although  baptism    and   the   Lord's    Supper  were  the 
most  important.     Peter  Lombard  said  that  if  Christ 
did   not    employ   them,    the    Apostles    at    least    did. 
Baptism,   confirmation,   and  ordination,   it  was  held, 
imparted  an  indelible  character,  therefore  could  not  be 
repeated.     All  consecrations  and  blessings  were  looked 
upon  as  different  from  the  sacraments  and  were  called 
"Sacramentalia."     It  was  asserted  also  that  the  ad- 

'  See  Robinson,  Readings,  i.,  348. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    593 


ministration  of  the  sacraments  in  the  hands  of  a  bad 
priest  was  valid. 

The  mass  continued  to  be  the  heart,  life  blood,  and 
very  centre  of  all  worship.  It  was  believed  to  be  a 
propitiatory  sacrifice  offered  to  God  for  the  sins  of  the 
world  whenever  the  sacrament  was  celebrated.  Christ 
was  recrucified  as  on  the  cross  at  each  mass.  The 
eucharist  gave  spiritual  nourishment  to  the  communi- 
cant, averted  evils  and  brought  blessings,  and,  with 
penance,  removed  the  guilt  of  sin.  Transubstantiation 
became  a  fixed  dogma  in  the  thirteenth  century.  Up 
to  the  ninth  century  the  Church  unanimously  believed 
that  the  real  body  and  blood  of  Christ  were  administered 
to  those  who  received  the  sacrament  of  the  eucharist, 
but  Christians  differed  widely  as  to  the  nature  and 
manner  of  their  presence  and  no  Pope  or  council  had 
settled  the  question.  In  831  Radbert  wrote  a  famous 
book  on  the  subject  in  which  he  held  that  after  con- 
secration only  the  figure  of  bread  and  wine  was  present 
and  that  the  rest  was  literal  body  and  blood  and 
that  this  body  and  blood  was  the  same  as  that  born 
of  Mary,  crucified,  and  raised  from  the  dead.  This 
work  created  a  warm  discussion  which  lasted  for  four 
centuries  and  provoked  many  bitter  individual  quarrels. 
Innocent  III.  in  1215  settled  the  dispute  by  making  the 
dogma  of  transubstantiation  a  part  of  the  constitutional 
law  of  the  Church  and  at  the  same  time  ordered  all  the 
laity  to  go  to  confession  and  to  partake  of  the  eucharist 
at  least  once  a  year.  The  dogma  did  not  pass  unques- 
tioned, although  the  common  people  had  no  difficulty  in 
believing  it. '  As  a  result  it  led  to  the  deification  of  the 
bread  and  wine,  to  the  use  of  beautiful  golden  or  silver 

»  John  Pegues  Assinus,  a  doctor  of  Paris  University,  substituted 
the  word  consubstantiation. 
38 


594     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


urns  and  cups  for  them,  to  the  construction  of  a 
costly  tabernacle  in  which  to  keep  the  sacred  elements, 
to  lamps  and  decorations,  to  solemn  processions,  to  a 
pompous  ceremony,  to  bowing  the  knee  before  the  host 
in  the  church  and  on  the  streets  and  to  prayer  to  the 
host  as  the  most  important  part  of  worship,  and  to 
the  celebration  throughout  the  whole  Church  of  an 
annual  festival  of  the  Holy  Sacrament  (1264).  The 
cup  was  withheld  from  the  laity  1  and  given  only  to  the 
priests  after  the  eleventh  century  because  it  was  feared 
that  the  wine  might  be  spilled  and  also  because  it  was 
believed  that  the  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  were  fully 
present  in  both  elements.2  Wafers,  called  the  host, 
were  substituted  for  the  broken  bread.  The  mass  soon 
became  an  object  of  commerce.  Private  masses  for 
the  living  and  particularly  for  the  dead,  begun  in  the 
eighth  century,  were  very  common  in  the  thirteenth, 
so  much  so,  in  fact,  that  certain  priests  had  no  other 
function  than  that  of  saying  masses  for  the  dead.  All 
over  Christendom  endowments  were  given  for  these 
masses  and  an  army  of  priests  did  nothing  else.  By 
refusing  mass  the  clergy  could  exert  strong  pressure 
on  individuals  and  governments.  The  mass  was  held  to 
be  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation,  and  the  eucharist 
was  even  given  to  little  children,  although  in  the  thir- 
teenth century  it  was  restricted  to  children  under 
seven.  It  also  had  a  marked  effect  upon  church  archi- 
tecture by  increasing  the  number  of  altars  in  the  church 
in  order  to  accommodate  the  increasing  number  of 
private  masses.     All   the   physical   and   metaphysical 


1  Kings,  at  their  coronation,  and  sometimes  at  the  approach  of 
death,  were  by  a  special  favour  given  the  cup. 

2  Alexander  of  Hales  gave  the  dogmatic  justification  of  this  idea. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   595 


education  of  the  age  turned  upon  the  question  of  the 
mass. x 

Penance  played  a  very  important  part  in  the  Church 
in  the  thirteenth  century  and  received  its  final  form 
in  the  Council  of  Florence  in  1439.  As  early  as  the 
fifth  century  a  regular  criminal  code  developed  in 
the  Church  and  in  the  seventh  century  a  Grecian 
monk  who  was  archbishop  enacted  a  body  of  severe 
laws  for  penitential  discipline  which  remained  in 
authority  until  the  twelfth  century.  The  climax  was 
reached  in  the  thirteenth  century  when  every  diocese 
had  its  own  penitential  code  and  public  penance  had 
been  replaced  by  private  penance.  Penance  was 
simply  the  punishment  prescribed  by  the  priest  to 
remove  the  guilt  of  sin,  and  usually  consisted  of 
fasts,  prayers,  pilgrimages,  and  acts  of  charity  and 
mercy.  The  Church  early  permitted  penance  to  be 
paid  by  substituting  money  payments  for  some  pious 
enterprise.2  Furthermore,  it  was  generally  held  that 
penance  afflicted  on  one  person  could  be  paid  by 
another;  for  example,  a  penance  of  seven  years  could  be 
accomplished  in  seven  days  by  a  sufficient  number 
of  co-workers.3  Even  Thomas  Aquinas  said  that  as 
long  as  the  debt  was  paid  it  mattered  little  who  paid 
it.  Indulgences  and  papal  pardons  paralleled  the  his- 
tory of  penance.  The  power  to  show  leniency,  or  to 
shorten  or  to  lengthen  the  character  or  the  time  of  pen- 
ance, was  early  recognised  to  be  in  the  bishop's  hands.4 
From  this  idea  there  gradually  arose  a  regular  system 
of  commutation  which  reached  the  highest  point  during 

*  Wasserschleben,  Bussordunung,  Halle,  1851. 

2  A  journey  to  the  Holy  Land  took  the  place  of  all  penance. 

»  Mansi,  Coll.  Concil.,  xviii.,  525. 

4  Fifth  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Ancyra  in  314. 


596     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


the  crusade  movement.  The  theory  was  most  fully 
stated  by  Thomas  Aquinas1  and  Alexander  of  Hales.2 
They  asserted  that  after  the  remission  of  the  eternal 
punishment  due  for  sin  there  still  remained  a  temporal 
punishment  to  be  undergone  either  in  this  life  or  in 
purgatory;  that  temporal  pain  might  be  remitted  by 
the  application  of  the  superabundant  merits  of  Christ 
and  the  saints  out  of  the  treasury  of  the  Church. 
The  hierarchy  was  the  custodian  of  that  prerogative. 
But  indulgence  could  be  granted  only  to  those  who 
were  in  full  communion  with  the  Church  and  who 
manifested  a  contrite  heart,  made  confession,  and 
submitted  to  penance.3  Penances  were  either  general 
or  local,  or  plenary  or  partial.  The  use  of  indulgences 
was  very  much  abused  since  they  were  often  granted 
only  for  money  and  because  they  were  employed  for 
trivial  and  secular  purposes  like  building  bridges4 
and  improving  roads.5  They  were  even  applied  to  the 
dead.6  The  doctrine  of  purgatory  had  developed 
by  the  twelfth  century  and  was  generally  accepted  in 
the  thirteenth.  7 

Auricular  confession,  which  seems  to  have  been 
fully  developed  by  the  time  of  Innocent  I.,8  was  required 
by  Innocent  III.  after  1216  of  all  Church  members  at 
least  once  a  year  under  penalty  of  exclusion  from  the 
Church.     It  was  an  essential  part  of  the  sacrament 

1  Summa,  supplement,  p.  3,  qu.  25. 

2  Summa,  p.  4,  qu.  23,  art.  1,  2,  memb.  5,  6. 

3  Lea,  Indulgences,  18  ff. 

4  Pflugh-Harttung,  Acta  Pontiff.,  iii.,  n.  408;  Potthast,  Regest. 
n.  3799. 

5  Lea,  Indulgences,  178. 

6  Ibid.,  314. 

7  Ibid.,  305,  310. 

8  Epist.,  I  Can.,  vii. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    597 


of  penance  and  gave  the  priests  a  tremendous  power 
over  the  people  which  was  used  both  for  good  and  ill. 
The  synod  of  Toulouse  in  1229  insisted  on  compulsory- 
confession  at  Christmas,  Easter,  and  Pentecost.  Any 
breach  of  the  confessional  was  visited  by  the  fourth 
Lateran  Council  with  excommunication,  deposition, 
and  imprisonment  for  life  in  a  monastery.  Confession 
was  the  bridle  by  means  of  which  the  laity  were 
guided  by  the  priesthood,  hence  the  Church  laid  more 
and  more  importance  upon  the  necessity  of  the  practice 
as  a  duty. 

Absolution  grew  up  as  a  necessary  part  of  auricular 
confession.  Before  the  thirteenth  century  the  priest 
acted  ministerially  and  used  the  form:  domus  absolvat 
te — misercatur  tui  omnipotens  deus  et  dimittat  tibi 
omnia  peccata  tua.  These  words  are  still  found  in  the 
Greek  Church  and  are  also  allowable  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  service.  After  the  thirteenth  century,  how- 
ever, the  priest  acted  judicially  and  said :  ego  absolvo  te. 
The  priest's  forgiveness  was  God's  forgiveness.  The 
requisites  for  absolution  were:  contrition  of  heart, 
promise  of  amendment  of  life,  and  reparation. 

Extreme  unction  as  a  sacrament  came  into  use  rather 
late.  Peter  Lombard  gave  it  fifth  place  among  the 
seven  sacraments.  Original  sin  was  atoned  for  in 
baptism,  actual  sins  by  penance,  and  extreme  unction 
wiped  away  all  remaining  sins  which  would  hinder 
the  soul  from  entering  its  perfect  rest.  Hence  it  was 
given  only  to  those  who  were  mortally  ill.  In  case 
of  recovery,  however,  it  could  be  repeated.1  The 
eyes,  ears,  nose,  mouth,  hands,  loins,  and  feet  (except 

1  After  receiving  extreme  unction  recipients  were  forbidden  to 
touch  the  ground  again  with  their  bare  feet  or  to  have  marital 
intercourse. 


598     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


of  women)  were  anointed  with  holy  oil  consecrated  by 
the  bishop  on  Maundy  Thursday.  Confession  and 
communion  preceded  the  rite.  These  three  together 
constituted  the  viaticum  of  the  soul  on  its  long  journey. 

From  the  time  when  private  meeting  places  gave 
way  to  places  of  public  worship,  throughout  its  whole 
career,  the  Church  has  employed  art  for  purposes  of 
utility  and  instruction.  The  transitional  character 
of  the  thirteenth  century  along  social,  ecclesiastical, 
intellectual,  and  political  lines  was  also  strongly  marked 
in  art.  In  the  conflict  between  feudalism  and  royalty, 
monarchy  gradually  gained  ground.  The  problem  of 
human  right  appeared  along  with  the  problem  of  human 
might.  Out  of  the  composite  struggle  of  kings,  feudal 
barons,  popes,  bishops,  abbots,  and  free  cities  emerged 
the  recognised  supremacy  of  papal  authority  as  the  one 
power  above  and  behind  all  others.  The  episcopacy 
stood  for  the  rights  of  the  Pope,  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  rights  of  the  people,  on  the  other.  Next 
to  the  papal  supremacy,  stood  the  kingly  prerogative. 
Under  the  double  patronage  of  the  Church  and  the 
state  ecclesiastical  art  advanced  with  rapid  strides. 

Gothic  architecture  reached  its  highest  development 
during  the  thirteenth  century.  Europe  was  covered 
with  magnificent  churches,  cathedrals,  and  monasteries. 
Architecture  was  the  dominant  art  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
The  church  building  occupied  a  unique  place  in  the 
community.  Everybody  was  a  member  of  the  Church 
and  attended  the  one  sacred  edifice  in  the  parish. 
The  erection  and  beautifying  of  a  new  church  was  a 
matter  of  interest  to  all.  Local  pride  was  deeply 
touched.  A  strong  rivalry  soon  developed,  which 
led  each  village  and  city  to  outdo  their  neighbours 
by  erecting  larger,  more  expensive,  and  more  beautiful 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    599 


chapels  and  cathedrals.  The  church  of  that  day  was 
the  centre  not  alone  of  religious  activity,  but  also  of 
local  politics,  of  community  business,  of  social  gather- 
ings, of  education,  and  of  the  fine  arts.  It  was  the 
very  heart  of  all  life,  and,  hence,  members  lavished  their 
affection,  their  time,  and  their  wealth  on  it.  Nothing 
in  our  community  life  to-day  can  be  well  compared 
with  the  church  of  that  day.  It  was  the  town  hall,  art 
museum,  club,  public  library,  school,  and  church  all  in 
one.  With  us  the  religious  interest  of  every  community 
is  divided  among  various  denominations,  while  the 
differentiation  of  our  other  institutions  has  destroyed 
the  earlier  unity  of  interest. 

The  Gothic  churches  with  pointed  arches  and  fly- 
ing buttresses  lightened  the  masonry  of  the  hitherto 
massive  walls,  pierced  them  with  great,  beautiful  stained 
glass  windows,  and  allowed  the  sunlight  to  stream  into 
the  dark  interiors.  Then  mosaics,  sculpture,  fresco, 
and  painting  were  used  to  enrich  and  decorate  the  inner 
parts.  Mouldings  and  capitals,  pulpits,  altars,  side 
chapels,  choir  screens,  the  wooden  seats  for  the  clergy 
and  choristers,  the  reading  desk,  and  the  tombs  were  lit- 
erally covered  with  carvings  of  leaf  and  flower  forms,  of 
familiar  animals  and  grotesque  monsters,  of  biblical 
scenes  and  ordinary  incidents.  The  exteriors  of  these 
wonderful  structures,  which  were  marvels  of  lightness 
and  delicacy  of  detail,  were  usually  ornamented 
with  an  army  of  statues  representing  apostles,  saints, 
donors,  and  rulers.  Is  it  a  matter  of  surprise  that 
the  bishops  and  clergy,  who  ruled  over  these  Christian 
temples  erected  in  love,  in  prayer,  and  in  self-sacrifice, 
should  be  honoured  and  obeyed?  These  wonderful 
houses  of  religion  were  the  glad  free-will  offerings  of  a 
devout  and   believing  people  to  the  mighty  Roman 


6oo     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


Catholic  Church  of  which  they  were  the  proud,  privileged 
members. 

A  splendid  picture  of  the  beautiful  devotion  of  the 
people  of  a  region  in  the  erection  of  a  magnificent 
cathedral  is  found  in  Chartres,  France.  That  wonderful 
edifice  was  begun  in  1194  and  completed  in  1240.  To 
construct  a  building  that  would  beautify  their  city  and 
satisfy  their  religious  aspirations  the  citizens  con- 
tributed of  their  strength  and  property  year  after 
year  for  nearly  half  a  century.  Far  from  home  they 
went  to  the  distant  quarries  to  dig  out  the  rock.  En- 
couraged by  their  priests  they  might  be  seen,  men, 
women,  and  children,  yoked  to  clumsy  carts  loaded 
with  building  materials.  Day  after  day  their  weary 
journey  to  and  from  the  quarries  continued.  When 
at  night  they  stopped,  worn  out  with  the  day's  toil, 
their  spare  time  was  given  up  to  confession  and  prayer. 
Others  laboured  with  more  skill  but  with  equal  devo- 
tion on  the  great  cathedral  itself.  As  the  grand  edifice 
grew  year  by  year  from  foundation  stone  to  towers, 
the  inhabitants  watched  it  with  pious  jealousy.  At 
length  it  was  completed;  not,  however,  until  many 
who  had  laboured  at  the  beginning  had  passed  away. 
Its  dedication  and  consecration  marked  an  epoch  in 
that  part  of  France. 

Most  historians  are  prone  to  dwell  upon  the  evils  of 
the  Church  in  this  period,  as  if  they  far  outweighed 
the  good.  Many  bishops  were  worldly  and  wicked, 
therefore  the  conclusion  is  drawn  that  all  bishops  were 
of  that  character,  whereas  out  of  the  700  bishops  in 
Europe  a  very  large  proportion  were  comparatively 
faithful  shepherds  who  were  striving  with  all  their 
might  to  realise  the  high  ideals  for  which  the  Church 
stood.     Many  of  the  clergy  were  guilty  of  gross  im- 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   66: 


morality,  hence  comes  the  sweeping  assertion  that  all 
the  clergy  were  unfit  for  their  high  and  noble  calling, 
while  as  a  matter  of  fact,  thousands  of  the  priests  obeyed 
the  laws  of  the  Church,  led  model  God-fearing  lives, 
and  continually  pointed  out  to  their  people  the  high 
and  certain  path  to  salvation.  Abuses,  corruptions, 
extortions,  did  exist  in  every  quarter  of  Christendom. 
Bad  clergymen  did  use  their  high  prerogatives  for 
base  purposes.  Many  bishops,  abbots,  and  priests 
were  no  more  worthy  to  be  given  extensive  powers  in 
trust  than  the  unscrupulous  politicians  who  often 
secure  high  places  in  our  municipal,  state,  and  national 
governments.  The  sinecures  and  benefices  of  the 
Church  offered  the  same  temptations  to  money- 
making  and  to  questionable  methods  that  our  civil 
offices  do  to-day  to  the  dishonest  and  unscrupulous 
office-holders.  But  all  of  the  officials  in  the  Church  in 
the  thirteenth  century  were  no  more  guilty  of  these 
evils  than  are  all  public  men  in  the  United  States  to-day 
addicted  to  the  practices  of  the  base  political  tricksters. 
It  seems  to  be  a  universal  fact  that  one  bad  man  in 
the  Church  attracts  more  attention  and  creates  more 
comment  than  a  multitude  of  good  men. 

The  fundamental  causes  of  the  numerous  evil 
practices  in  the  Church  are  found  in  the  wealth  and 
power  of  the  Roman  ecclesiastical  organisation,  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  comparatively  low  moral  standards 
of  civilisation,  on  the  other.  Throughout  its  whole 
remarkable  career  of  thirteen  hundred  years,  the 
Catholic  Church  had  denounced  the  bad  and  taught  the 
good.  Unfortunately  in  attempting  to  realise  the  king- 
dom of  God  on  earth  through  that  organisation 
which  was  assumed  to  be  of  divine  origin,  life  and 
practice  did  not  always  harmonise  with  the  doctrines 


6o2     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


inculcated.  The  ideal  and  the  real  are  seldom  brought 
to  coincide  in  any  human  institutions  and  it  would 
be  expecting  a  realisation  of  the  well-nigh  impossible 
to  hope  to  see  the  consummation  of  that  desirable 
condition  in  the  mediaeval  Church  when  all  the  contra- 
dictory factors  and  forces  are  taken  into  account.  But 
it  can  be  safely  asserted,  when  all  debits  and  credits  of 
baneful  and  beneficial  are  given  just  consideration, 
that  the  mighty  Church  at  its  height  was  the  most 
powerful  force  in  Europe  for  justice,  for  mercy,  for 
charity,  for  peace  among  men,  for  honesty,  for  tem- 
perance, for  human  rights,  for  social  service,  for 
culture,  for  domestic  purity,  for  obedience  to  law 
and  order,  and  for  a  noble,  helpful  Christian  life  both 
for  individuals  and  states. 

The  sublime  foundations  on  which  the  Church 
rested,1  the  marvellous  history  it  could  point  to,  its 
peerless  organisation,  its  vast  wealth,  its  strong  grip 
on  the  faith  of  the  people,  its  close  alliance  with  the 
state,  all  combined  to  make  its  officers,  the  clergy, 
the  most  influential  social  class  in  Europe.  In  their 
hands  were  the  keys  of  heaven  and  without  their 
permission  no  one  could  hope  to  enter;  since  they 
were  about  the  only  educated  class,  they  wrote  the 
books  and  directed  all  advance  along  intellectual, 
literary,  and  artistic  lines.  In  short  they  moulded 
the  progress  of  that  day.  They  wrote  public  docu- 
ments and  proclamations  for  rulers,  sat  in  royal  councils, 
and  acted  as  governmental  ministers.2   They  dominated 

1  Read  the  bull  UnamSanctatnoi  Boniface  VIII.  (1302).  Robin- 
son, Readings,  i.,  346. 

2  As  late  as  the  thirteenth  century,  an  offender  who  wished  to 
prove  that  he  was  a  priest  in  order  to  obtain  the  privilege  of  trial  by 
a  church  court  had  to  show  that  he  could  read  a  single  line.      This 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height   603 


every  human  interest,  regulated  more  or  less  every 
phase  of  life  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  conferred  inestim- 
able benefit  upon  Europe  of  that  day  and  this. 

The  Church  in  this  age  was  the  dominant  factor  in 
European  civilisation.  It  fashioned  laws  and  dictated 
the  policy  of  governments;  it  controlled  education  and 
intelligence;  it  influenced  occupations  and  industries; 
it  moulded  social  ideas  and  customs;  and  it  set  the 
standards  of  morality  and  determined  the  life  and 
conduct  of  both  this  world  and  that  to  come.  The 
Church  was  divided  into  two  sharply  defined  classes: 
the  laity  and  the  priesthood.  "The  great  division  of 
mankind,  which  .  .  .  had  become  complete  and  abso- 
lute, into  the  clergy  .  .  .  and  the  rest  of  mankind, 
still  subsisted  in  all  of  its  rigorous  force.  They  were 
two  castes,  separate  and  standing  apart  as  by  the 
irrepealable  law  of  God.  They  were  distinct,  adverse, 
even  antagonistic,  in  their  theory  of  life,  in  their  laws, 
in  their  corporate  property,  in  their  rights,  in  their 
immunities.  In  the  aim  and  object  of  their  existence, 
in  their  social  duties  and  position,  they  were  set  asunder 
by  a  broad,  deep,  impassable  line."  *  The  priesthood, 
with  an  indelible  character,  married  to  the  Church,  stood 
between  God  and  man  and  tended  to  become  "The 
Church." 

The  Church  was  essentially  an  organised  state, 
thoroughly  centralised,  with  one  supreme  head  and  a 
complete  gradation  of  officials;  with  a  comprehensive 
system  of  law  courts  for  trying  cases,  with  penalties 
covering  all  crimes,  and  with  prisons  for  punishing 
offenders.     It  demanded   an   allegiance   from   all  its 

was  called  benefit  of  clergy.  See  Robinson,  Readings,  vol.  i.,  ch.  16; 
Lea,  Hist,  of  Inq.,  iii.,  57. 

»  Milman,  Lot.  Christ.,  vi.,  357. 


604     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


members  somewhat  like  that  existing  to-day  between 
subjects  and  a  state.  It  developed  one  official  language, 
the  Latin,  which  was  used  to  conduct  its  business  every- 
where. Thus  all  western  Europe  was  one  great  religious 
association  from  which  it  was  treason  to  revolt.  Canon 
law  punished  such  a  crime  with  death,  public  opinion 
sanctioned  it,  and  the  secular  arm  executed  the  sentence. 

The  Church  Militant  was  thus  an  army  encamped  on  the 
soil  of  Christendom,  with  its  outposts  everywhere,  subject 
to  the  most  efficient  discipline,  animated  with  a  common 
purpose,  every  soldier  panoplied  with  inviolability  and 
armed  with  the  tremendous  weapons  which  slew  the  soul. 
There  was  little  that  could  not  be  dared  or  done  by  the 
commander  of  such  a  force,  whose  orders  were  listened  to  as 
oracles  of  God,  from  Portugal  to  Palestine  and  from  Sicily 
to  Iceland. 1 

History  records  no  such  triumph  of  intellect  over  brute 
force  as  that  which,  in  an  age  of  turmoil  and  battle,  was 
wrested  from  the  fierce  warriors  of  the  time  by  priests  who 
had  no  material  force  at  their  command,  and  whose  power 
was  based  alone  on  the  souls  and  consciences  of  men. 
Over  soul  and  conscience  their  empire  was  complete. 
No  Christian  could  hope  for  salvation  who  was  not  in 
all  things  an  obedient  son  of  the  Church,  and  who  was 
not  ready  to  take  up  arms  in  its  defence ;  and,  in  a  time 
when  faith  was  a  determining  factor  of  conduct,  this  belief 
created  a  spiritual  despotism  which  placed  all  things  within 
reach  of  him  who  could  wield  it.2 

In  the  thirteenth  century  the  mediaeval  Church 
was  a  completed  institution  and  at  the  height  of  its 
power.  Its  rise  from  humble  beginnings,  by  a  multi- 
tude of  explainable  causes  and   forces,   to  this  lofty 

*  Lea,  Hist,  of  the  Inq.,  i.,  4. 

*  Ibid.,  i.,  1. 


The  Mediaeval  Church  at  its  Height    605 


position  is  a  well-nigh  incredible  miracle.  It  was 
very  different  from  all  modern  churches  whether 
Catholic  or  Protestant,  yet  was  the  mother  of  all  of 
them.  Both  theoretically  and  legally  all  persons  in 
western  Europe  belonged  to  it  and  were  ruled  by  it, 
except  those  who  were  expelled  from  it,  and  thus 
formed  one  mighty  religious  society,  the  like  of  which 
has  not  again  appeared  in  Christendom.  Unable 
during  subsequent  centuries  to  meet  the  demands 
of  new  and  higher  phases  of  civilisation,  the  mediaeval 
Church  broke  up  into  the  various  Christian  sects  of 
to-day. 

Sources 

A.— PRIMARY: 

i. — Eales,  Life  and  Works  of  St.  Bernard. 

2. — Henderson,  Historical  Documents  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages. 

3. — Lea,  C.  H.,  A  Formulary  of  the  Papal  Peni- 
tentiary in  the  Thirteenth  Century. 

4. — Migne,  Patrologia  Latina. 

5. — Morley,  Medieval  Tales. 

6. — Robinson,  Readings    in    European    History. 

7. — Steele,  R.,  Medicsval  Lore.     Lond.,  1893. 

8. — Thatcher  and  McNeal,  A  Source-Book  for 
MedicBval  History. 

9. — Univ.  of  Penn.,  Translations  and  Reprints. 
B.— SECONDARY: 
1. — special: 

1. — Bethune-Baker,,  J.  F.,  The  Influence  of  Chris- 
tianity on  War.     Camb.,  1888. 

2. — Brace,  G.  L.,  Gesta  Christi.     Lond.,  1886. 

3. — Cornish,  Chivalry. 

4. — Cutts,  E.  L.,  Scenes  and  Characters  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  Lond.,  1872.  Parish  Priests 
and  their  People.     Lond.,  1890. 

5. — Dollinger,  J.  J.  I.,  Papal  Fables  of  the  Middle 
Ages. 

6. — Fournier,  Les  officialites  au  moyen  age. 

7. — Gautier,  Chivalry. 


606     The  Rise  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 


8. — Jessopp,  The  Coming  of  the  Friars. 
9. — Lea,  H.  C,  History  of  Auricular  Confession. 
3  vols.  Phil.,  1896.  History  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion. 3  vols.  History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy. 
Superstition  and  Force.  Studies  in  Church 
History. 

10. — Luchaire,  Manuel  des  institutions. 

11. — Maitland,  The  Dark  Ages. 

12. — Milman,  H.  H.,  History  of  Latin  Christianity. 
viii.,  bk.  14,  ch.  1-10. 

13. — Prevost,  L'eglise  et  les   compagnes  au  moyen 

14. — Rashdall,  History  of  the  Universities  of  Europe 

in  the  Middle  Ages. 
15. — Smith,  The  Troubadours  at  Home. 

II. GENERAL. 

Adams,  Med.  Civ.,  ch.  16,  18.  Blunt,  i.,  ch. 
10-12.  Coxe,  Lect.  5-7.  Darras,  iii.,  ch.  8-10. 
Dehorbe,ch.  11,  42.  Fisher,  pd.  6,  ch.  6.  Foulkes, 
ch.  11,  12.  Gieseler,  iii.,  ch.  1,  2,  5,  and  6.  Gil- 
martin,  ii.,  ch.  5-13.  Hardwick,  ch.  8,  10,  11, 
12.  Hase,  sec.  192-237.  Hurst,  i.,  ch.  50. 
Jennings,  ii.,  ch.  12,  13.  Knight,  ch.  14-16. 
Kurtz,  ii.,  89-138.  Milner,  iii.,  cent.  12,  13. 
Moeller,  ii.,  pd.  2,  ch.  5;  iii.,  ch.  2  and  3.  Nean- 
der,  iv.  Robertson,  bk.  5,  ch.  13;  bk.  6,  ch.  6-8. 
Sikes,  ch.  17. 


INDEX 


Abbots,  217,  218, 42i;ofClugny, 

429 
Abelard,  511,  518,  559 

Absolution,  590,  597 

Abstinents,  204 

Abubekr,  479 

Abuses,  clerical,  421,  426,  430, 

432-  548,  563 
Abu  Taleb,  479 
Acolytes,  63 
Acre,  fall  of,  499 
Actium,  battle  of,  41 
Adalbert,  398,  425 
Adaldag,  251 
Adalgar,  251 
Adelaide,  392,  402 
Adelbert,  243 
Adelbert  of  Bremen,  438 
Adelbert  of  Prague,  249,  257 
Adelpert,  165 

Adhemar,  Bishop  of  Pui,  494 
^Erius  of  Sebasta,  220 
African  Church,  155 
Agents  at  Eastern  court,  299 
Agilbert,  239 
Agilulf,  King,  243 
Agnes,  Empress,  451 
Agobard  of  Lyons,  283,  364 
Agriculture,  198 
Aidan,  164 
Alaric  II.,  296 
Albertus  Magnus,  525 
Albigenses,  501,  506,    560,    562, 

,  572 

Alcuin,  249,  311,  318 

Aldich,  335 

Alemanni,  234,  243 

Aleontera,  order  of,  514 

Alexander    II.,    360,    364,    369, 

442,  446,  451 


Alexander  III.,    362,   364,   379, 

413.  545 
Alexander  IV.,  536 
Alexander  of   Alexandria,    137, 

138,  141,  349 
Alexander  of  Hales,  597 
Alexander  the  Great,  199,  318 
Alexander    Severus,     103,     268, 

291 
Alexius,  Emperor,  493,  495 
Ali,  479 
Alliance  of  Church  and  State, 

202,  204 
Alliance   of   Pope  and    Franks, 

3°2.  3°4,  3°5»  3°7 
Alms,  352 
Amania,  165 
Ambrose,    170,    211,    213,    295, 

368,  380 
Ammon,  205,  208 
Anacletus,  331 
Anagni,  545 
Anastasius,  174,  365 
Andrew,  St.,  257 
Angels,  354 
Angles,  235 

Anglo-Saxon  invasion,  240 
Anicetus,  155 
Anne,  257 

Ansgar,  250,  253,  341 
Anthony    of    Alexandria,     205, 

211 
Anthony,  order  of,  514 
Anthony,  St.,  203,  208,  427 
Antioch,  captured,  495 
Antioch,  Council  of,  178,  348 
Anti-Petrine  view,  77 
Antoninus  Pius,  102 
Apiarius,  167 
Apostles,  56;  and  monasticism, 

201 ;  and  the  state,  290 
Apostles'  Creed,  356,  371 


607 


6o8 


Index 


Apostolic  Christianity,  202 

Apostolic  Church,  154,  160 ff., 
202,  375 

Apostolic  constitutions,  1 63 ;  ca- 
nons, 178,  330,  331 

Apostolic  seat,  61 

Apostolic  succession,  61 

Appeals  to  Rome,  155,  169, 
175,  34S,  562,  575 

Aquileia,  Council  of,  171 

Aquinas,  Thomas,  373>525>592> 

595>  596 
Arabia,    in   570,   476  ff.;    under 

Mohammea,  480 
Arabs,  476^". 
Archbishops,  61;  22  in  Europe, 

3J5;  33 6">  origin  of,  348-350; 

power,  350;  in  13th  century, 

581,  582 
Archdeacons,  62 
Architecture,  598,  599,  600 
Arian  controversy,   120,    136^., 

175,  266,  294 
Arian  princes  conquered,  302 
Arianism,    143,    145,    189,    232, 

233 
Arians,  139,  141,  142,  144,  145, 

166 
Aristotle,  47 

Arius,   137,   138,   141,   144 
Aries,  Council  of,  119,  144,  162, 

163,  175,  244,  293,  353 
Arler,  Council  of,  in  813,  313 
Arnold,  16 

Arnold  of  Brescia,  511,  518,  559 
Arnoldites,  519 
Arnulf,  387 
Art,  42,  270 

Asceticism,  use  of,  64,  199;  at- 
tacks on,  218,  219 
Ascetics,    203;    none    in    early 

Church,  204;  427 
Athalaric,  296 
Athanasius,  9,  139,  141,  142,  144, 

166,   181,  206,  209,   211,   212, 

349 
Athens,  48 
Attila,  184 
Augustine,  St.,  9,  168,  170,  211, 

213,  372 
Augustine's  City  of  God,  318 
Augustine,     Abbot,     165,     235, 

236,  237,  238 
Augustine,  Rule  of,  511 
Augustinians,  536,  539 


Augustus,  48,  94 

Aurelian,  105,  156 

Aurelius,  330 

Avars,  308,  309 

Avis,  order  of,  514 

Aymar,  abbot  of  Clugny,  429 


B 


Babbio,  243 

Baldwin  of  Bouillon,  494 

Baldwin  II.,  513 

Bans,  564 

Baptism,     181,    219,    352,    372, 

374-  375 
Baptisteries,  375 
Barbarian   invasions,    169,    180, 

183,  293,  357,  385;  later,  388 
Barbarians,  conversion  of,  230, 

^  231  • 
Baronius,  16 

Basil,  St.,  139,  167,  210 

Basil,  Rule  of,  212 

Basil,  Emperor,  257 

Basques,  308 

Baur,  17 

Bavarians,  302,  308 

Bede,  16,  73,  235,  240 

Begging  orders,  216,  518^".,  536, 

537     , 
Beghards,  519,  520,  538 

Beguins,  519,  520 

Bellsarius  deposes  a  Pope,  297 

Bells,  372 

Benedict,  187,  213 

Benedict  VII.,  402 

Benedict  VIII.,   368,  407,  408, 

420,  426 
Benedict  IX.,  410,  420 
Benedict  X.,  438,  439 
Benedictine  Rule,  190,  214-216, 

428,  431,  432 
Benedictines,  199,  248,  434 
Benedictus  Levita,  335 
Berengar,  387 
Berengar  II.,  392,  395 
Bernard,  St.,  368,  369,  402,  491, 

496,  511,  513,  516,  518,  570 
Bernard  of  Quintavalle,  528 
Bertha,  236 
Bible  manuscripts,  269 
Bishop  of  Rome,  76,  77,  107,  149, 

IS1!  I53.  x54,  iSS.  IS8; 
accepted  as  Peter's  successor, 
160,    170;     claims     appellate 


Index 


609 


Bishop  of  Rome — Continued 
power,  165;  greatest  man  in 
Western  Europe,  168;  settles 
disputes,  169;  primacy  of,  172, 
175;  power  approved  by  Em- 
peror, 178;  calls  councils, 
294;  becomes  a  temporal 
prince,  302 

Bishoprics  created  in  Germany, 
247,  249,  253 

Bishoprics   founded  in  France, 

3°3 

Bishops,  57;  equality  of,  176; 
increase  their  power,  322; 
subjected  to  state,  337;  elec- 
tion of,  351;  duties,  351.^"., 
421;  in  the  East,  501;  in  13th 
century,  582^". 

Bishops,  provincial,  158 

Bjorn,  King,  253 

Black  friars,  see  Dominicans. 

Blondel,  David,  333 

Bogaris,  Duke,  256 

Bohemia,  449 

Bohemian  Church,  255 

Bohemians,  255,  391,  401 

Bohemond,  494,  495 

Boleslav  the  Cruel,  255 

Boleslaw  II.,  369 

Bologna    University,    545,    579, 

589 

Bonasus,  220 

Bonaventura,  537,  538 

Boniface,  165,  305,  309 

Boniface,  St.,  244^.,  330,  333 

Boniface  I.,  295 

Boniface  IV.,  378,  380 

Boniface  VII.,  402 

Boniface  VIII.,  413,  525,  581 

Borziway,  Duke,  255 

Bossuet,  16 

Brescia,  Council  of,  467 

Bretons,  308 

Breviarium,  330 

Bridge  Brothers,  515 

Bridget,  St.,  240 

British  Christians,  238 

Brotherhoods  of  the  Peace  of 
God,  359 

Brothers  and  Sisters  of  Peni- 
tence, 530 

Brothers  of  the  Sword,  514 

Bruno,  249,     399,    424,  '434  ff-, 

S11 
Bruno,  abbot  of  Clugny,  428 


Bruno  of  Cologne,  510 
Buddha,  199 
Bulgarians,  253,  256,  407 
Burghers,     increase    in    impor- 
tance, 570 
Burgundian  Code,  363 
Burgundians,  145,  232,  302 
Burgundy     united     with     Ger- 
many, 406 
Byzantine  Empire,  126,  405 
Byzantine  historians,  16 


Caecilius,  95 

Caesar,  Augustus,  48,  94,  318 

Caesar,  Julius,  48 

Caesar,  Tiberius,  48 

Caesarins,  538 

Caius,  80,  86 

Calatrava,  order  of,  514 

Calendar  of  saints,  378 

Calistus,  358 

Calixtus  I.,  177,  452 

Calixtus  II.,  472 

Callistus,  160,  163 

Calvin,  333 

Camaldolites,  429^".,  445 

Candles,  220 

Canon  law,    143,    246,   370,    549 

Canonisation,  379 

Canons  of  the  Church,  142,  144, 

145,  266,  329 
Canossa,  463  ff. 
Canute,  407,  409 
Capitula  Angilramni,  331 
Capuchins,  539 
Caracalla,  103 
Carloman,  216,  304,  307 
Carmelites,  520,  539 
Carnales,  338 
Caroline  Books,  283 
Carolingian    Empire,    321,    386, 

__  387,  39i  .  .  . 

Carolingian    policy    of    division. 

of  rule,  320,  348 
Carthage,  Church  of,  449 
Carthage,  Council  of,  171 
Carthusians,  510,  570 
Cassian,  211,  213,  521 
Cassiodorus,  330 
Catacombs,  268 
Catechists,  63 
Catechumens,  374,  375 
Catharii,  511 


6io 


Index 


Catharists,  560 

Catholic  Church,  5,  75,  107,  148; 
unity  of,  156,  157 

Cedd,  Bishop,  239 

Celestine,  168,  174 

Celestine  III.,  362,  364,  551 

Celestine  V.,  512,  538 

Celestines,  512,  538 

Celibacy,  64,  143,  161,  181, 
190,  203,  220,  247,  266,  300, 
355.  356.  420,  436,  439,  442, 
45°.     452.    453  ff;    544,     564 

Celsus,  95 

Celtic  missionaries,  164,  246 

Celts,  235,  237,  241,  244 

Chalcedon,  Council  of,  172,  174, 
184,    194,   218,   294,   297,  349 

Chapter,  584^. 

Charity,  159,  198,  364,  365 

Charlemagne,  see  Charles  the 
Great. 

Charles  the  Bald,  319,  342, 
385 

Charles  the  Fat,  321,  385,  386, 

„  387 

Charles  the  Great,  9,  126,  187, 
217,  234,  248,  249,  250,  253, 
254,  255,  258;  life  of,  307-308; 
controls  Papacy,  308;  re- 
forms Church,  309;  Emperor, 
309-312;  results  of  his  rule, 
3 1 2-3 1 7 ;  character,  317;  suc- 
cessors, 319-320;  331,  334, 
339,  34i,  348,  354,.  363,  366, 
372;     decline    of   his   empire, 

384,  385,  389;  392,  393,  395, 
398,  400,  405,  410,  412,  414, 
443,  446,  455,  471,  486,  487 
Charles  Martel,    245,   247,    258, 

3°3,  487 

Charles  the  Simple,  385,  390 

Charroux,  synod  of,  358 

Chiersy,  synod  of,  334 

Childerick  III.,  304 

Chivalry,  490,  502,  506 

Chosroes  II.,  484 

Christ,  order  of,  514 

Christendom,  size  in  604,  231; 
extent  in  13th  century,  259 

Christianity,  46;  illegal,  93;  102, 
107;  spread  of,  113;  126,  128, 
149,  150;  in  first  and  second 
centuries,  203 ;  spread  to  Ire- 
land, 240;  Scotland,  241;  ma- 
terialised, 270;  political  philo- 


sophy   of   early,    289;   not   a 
"religiolicita,"  290;  compared 
with     Roman    religion,     292; 
compared  with  Mohammedan- 
ism, 426,  481 
Christians,   number   of,   54;   92, 
94,   95,   96,   97,   99,    102,    104, 
105,  106,  107;  number  in  305, 
113;  in  Rome,   148;  number, 
259;    268;    increase    of,    291; 
refuse  to  conform,  291 
Chrysostom,  139,  167,  232,  271 
Church  and  state,  423,  435, 
Church,     apostolic,     compared, 

160  ff. 
Church  Canons,  142,  144,  145 
Church  Christian,  sources  on, 
1 2 ;  in  New  Test.  ,15;  contribu- 
tions of  Jews  and  pagans,  53  ; 
organisation,  55,  56;  Roman 
Empire  a  model,  148;  changes 
in,  149;  early  evils,  163;  unity 
of,  169;  changes  in,  180;  pro- 
perty, 190;  necessary  for  sal- 
vation, 194;  secularised,  201 ; 
worldliness  in,  203;  reflects  its 
age,  260;  compared  with  the 
state,  292;  recognises  suprem- 
acy of  the  state,  292;  union 
with  state  not  all  evil,  293; 
paganised,  293;  rules  Europe 
for  1000  years,  294;  ruled  by 
Empire  after  Constantine, 
294,  295;  alienation  of  pro- 
perty forbidden,  296;  in  7th 
and  8th  century,  300;  receives 
property  from  Clovis,  302; 
Pepin  303;  and  Charles  the 
Great,  312;  divided  into  22 
archbishoprics,  315;  declines, 
322;  constitution  of,  337;  and 
state,  338;  founded  on  Peter, 
343 ;  moral  arch  of  safety,  356; 
slavery,  356;  peace,  358  ff; 
private  war,  358;  ordeals,  362; 
charity,  365;  discipline,  366; 
worship,  370;  sacraments,  3  73  ; 
above  state,  418;  corruptions, 
422;  in  1073,  445;  property, 
sale  of,  451;  feudalised,  455; 
wealth  of,  501;  crusades,  502; 
attains  its  claims,  569;  extent 
and  wealth,  574;  good  and 
evil,  600  ff.;  in  13th  century, 
602  ff. 


Index 


6n 


Church  Fathers,  deplore  vices 
in  Church,  180;  191,  201;  com- 
mand asceticism,  203,  216; 
approve  images,  272,  276; 
and  the  state,  290;  318,  330, 
357,  365,  376 

Church  government,  system  of, 
60;  evolution  of,  64;  184;  re- 
gulated, 297;  446 

Church  history,  study  of,  1-10; 
sources  on,  10— 11;  not  theo- 
logy, 7 ;  revival  of  interest  in,  7 

Church  officers,  57,  162,  260,  455 

Churches,  endowed  in  Rome, 
118;  265;  decorated,  272;  and 
shrines,  378;  erected  to  Our 
Lady,  381;  erected  in  Holy 
Land,  484 

Cicero,  41,  42,  93 

Cistercians,    249,    511,   570,    591 

Civil  law,  452 

Civilisation,  mediaeval,  381,  505 

Clairvaux,  570 

Clarenius,  538 

Classical  influences,  260 

Claudius,  48,  113 

Claudius,  Bishop  of  Turin,  283 

Clement  II.,  410,  427,  434 

Clement  III.,  362,  467,  546,  579, 

589 

Clement  VIII.,  526 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  80,  86, 
269 

Clement  of  Rome,  57,  80,  84,  86, 
153,  155,  160,  177 

Clergy,  houses,  64;  reformed, 
190;  regulated,  297;  influence 
of,  354!  incomes,  355;  higher, 
420-422  ;  under  Gregory  VII., 
448;  in  13th  century,  517; 
criticised,  571;  cut  off  from 
laity,  587  ff- 

Clermont,  Council  of,  360,  489, 

49.2 
Clovis,  234,  302,  303 
Clugniacs,  199;  reformation,  424 

.ft-;  435 

Clugny,  428  ff.,  434,  436,  490 
Ccelestius,  173 
Coleman,  Bishop,  239 
College  of  Cardinals,  439  ff-,  580 
Columba,  241,  264 
Columbanus,  164,  242,  243 
Columbus,  253,  505 
Commodion,  80 


Commodus,  103 

Common  people,  45 

Communism,  64 

Concordat  of  Worms,  472,  473, 
545,  582 

Concubinage,  451 

Confession,  218,  352,  367,  426, 
596 

Confirmation,  352,  375 

Conrad  of  Franconia,  390 

Conrad  II.,  4°7#->  455 

Conrad  III.,  496 

Constantia,  141,  271 

Constantine,  9,  54,  106;  Roman 
Empire  under,  112;  life  of, 
iiT,ff.;  vision  of  the  cross,  117 
ff.,  125;  character,  121/.;  suc- 
cessors, 127;  Arian  controver- 
sy, 139  .#•;  i59;  legalised 
Christianity,  160;  162;  aid  to 
Church,  175;  219,  232,  269, 
270,  271;  subjects  Christian- 
ity to  the  state,  292;  294,318, 
33l,  336,  354,  365,  372,  374, 

„  379       •       TT 
Constantine  II.,  144 

Constantine  V.,  277,  280 

Constantinople,  fall  of,  286,  449 

Constantinople,  second   Council 

of,  145,  178,  281,  282 

Constantinople,  synod  of,  277 

Constantius,  144,  294 

Constantius    Chlorus,  113,  114, 

ZI5 
Constitution  of  Lothair,  395 

Constitution  of  Otto  I.,  395 

Conte,  Le,  333 

Conversion,  mediaeval,  23 1  ff. 

Converts,  pagan,  180 

Cornelius,  79 

Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  338,  360, 

588,  589 
Corruptions    in    the  Church    in 

10th  and  nth  centuries,  422; 

13th  century,  563 
Council,  Reform,  of  1074,  450 
Councils,  162,  237,  266,  294,  313, 

376,  421,  452,  471,  544 
Credulity   of   Western    Europe, 

487 
Creed,  Nicene,  171 
Creighton,  17 
Crescentius,  403 
Cross,  269,  271 
Cross  bearers,  order  of,  514 


6l2 


Index 


Crusades,  249,  258,  377,  404, 
450 ;  causes,  483  ff. ;  time,  pur- 
pose, and  number, 4giff.;  first, 
493  if. ;  second,  496^.;  third, 
497;  fourth,  498;  minor  cru- 
sades, 498^.;  failed,  499;  re- 
sults, 500^".;  children's,  492; 
against  heretics,  561 

Culdees,  241,  252 

Culture,  198 

Curia,  Roman,  562 

Cyprian,  80,  82,  107,  155,  158, 
159,  160,  205,  372 

Cyril,  139,  168 

Cyrillus,  254,  255,  256 

Czechs,  253,  388 


D 


Damascus,  181 
Damasus,  295,  330,  434 
Damiani,  371,  373,  432  ff.,  436, 

438.  44i,  442 
Danes,  253,  388,  391,  392,  399, 

401,  407 
David,  Sultan,  493 
Deacons,  56,  364 
Decian  persecution,  203 
Decius,  98,  104,  105 
Decretals,    173;   of   Gregory   I., 

i74  .      . 

Decretum  Graham,  589 
Dedication  of  churches,  352 
De  Gama,  505 
De  Moulin,  333 
Democracy  of  Papacy,  300 
Denis,  St.,  74,  164 
Denmark,  Church  in,  250,  251 
Deposition  of  a  Pope,  297 
"  Deposito  Marty  rum,"  Si 
Devil,  354 
Dictatus  Papas,  448 
Didymus,  Blind,  139 
Diet  of  Worms,  434,  460 
Dioceses,  349 

Diocletian,  98,  105,  112,  114 
Dionysius  Areopagite,  373 
Dionysius  Exiguus,  330,  334 
Dionysius,    Bishop   of    Corinth, 

80,  86 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  137 
Dionysius  of  Rome,  137,  156 
Discipline,  366,  376 
Divorce  not  permitted,  356,  564 
Doctrine  of  Addai,  81 


Doctrines,  591 

Doge  of  Venice,  430 

Dogma,  295,  572 

Dollinger,  17 

Dominic,  St.,  518,  519^.;  youth 
and  education,  521;  goes  to 
France,  522;  rebukes  the  Cis- 
tercians, 522;  founds  St.  Rou- 
en, 523;  order  approved  by 
Innocent  III.,  523;  organisa- 
tion, 524;  spread,  525;  death, 

^  525.  57° 

Dominicans,  259,  432,  502,  521, 

525#->  57°,  S9i 
Dominicus,  St.,  429 
Domitian,  100,  101 
Domitilla,  100 
Donation   of   Constantine,   332, 

334 
Donation  of  Pepin,  306 
Donatists,  136,  189 
Donatus,  212 
Dorylaeum,  battle  of,  495 
Dryer,  17 
Dunstan,  St.,  427 
Duran  de  Husce,  519 


E 


East  and  the  West,  breach  be- 
tween, 438 

Easter,  date  of,  143,  155,  160, 
220,  239,  240,  266 

Eastern  Church,  155,  184,  231, 
266 

Eastern  Church  and  Western 
compared,  286 

Eastern  Empire,  502;  estranged 
from  the  Western,    503,    549 

Ebionites,  132,  136 

Ebo,  Archbishop  of  Rheims,  250, 

335 
Ecclesia  and   Jewish   kingdom, 

56 
Ecclesiastical  monarchy,  301 
Edessa,  fall  of,  496 
Edict  of  Milan,  119,  174 
Edict  of  380,  128 
Education,    under    Charles    the 

Great,  317,  356 
Ekkehard,  401 
Elders,  duties  of,  59 
Election  of  clergy,  193 
Election  of  Pope,  296,  297,  298 
Elias,  210 


Index 


613 


Elizabeth,  46 
Elvira,  Council  of,  163 
Elvira,  synod  of,  268,  276 
Emerton  on  study  of  Church  his- 
tory, 1 
Emperor,  289,  295 ;  German,  445, 
446;    Eastern,  and   crusades, 

Empire,  prosperous,  40;  moral 
condition,  46;  union  with  Pa- 
pacy, 175;  spiritualised,  293; 
revival  under  Otto  I.,  391; 
and  Papacy,  398;  distracted, 

549 
Eon  del'Etoile,  558 
Ephesus,  Council   of,   168,    171, 

294 
Ephraem,  139 
Episcopal    cases    taken    out    of 

secular  courts,  337 
Erasmus,  332 
Erfurt,  Council  of,  453 
Eric,  251,  252 
Eschylus,  43 
Esquimos,  252 
Essenes,  44,  200,  209 
Estates  of  the  Church,  3  65 
Ethelbert,  236,  237,  238 
Eucharist,    266,   363,   370,   372, 

373.  374,  558 
Eudoxia,  167 
Eugenius  II.,  361 
Eugenius  III.,  496 
Eusebius  of  Cassarea,  15,  54,  71, 

81,    102,    106,    117,    118,    139, 

141,  211,  271 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  139 
Eustace  of  Bouillon,  494,  495, 

496 
Eustathius,  210 
Evagrius,  15 
Ewald,  165,  244,  249 
Exarchs,  349 
Excommunication,  155,157,  158, 

172,  367  ff-,  561,  576  77-.  597 
Exorcists,  63 
Extreme  unction,  377,  597,  598 


Fabiola,  365 
Fasting,  203,  220,  367 
Felix  II.,  145,  185 
Festival  of  All  Saints,  378 
Festival  of  All  Souls,  378 


Festival  of  Orthodoxy,  282 
Festival    of   the   Annunciation, 

381 
Festival    of    the    Ascension    of 

Mary,  381 
Festival  of  the  Purification  of 

Mary,  381 
Festivals  multiplied,    161,    193, 

375  . 
Feudalism,  217,  389,  503,  505, 

5i5,  574 

Filioque,  266,  285 

Finances  of  Rome,  445 

Fisher,  17 

Flagellants,  432,  506 

Flavian,  9,  167 

Flavius  Clemens,  100 

Florence,  Council  of,  in  1439, 
285 

Fontevraud,  order  of,  511 

Formosus,  386,  387,  419 

Fortunatus,  155 

Foulques  de  Neuilly,  519 

France,  beginnings  of,  231 

Francis,  St.,  9,  51S,  $2bff.\  early 
career,  $26  ff. ;  forms  an  order, 
528  _$\;  confirmed  by  Pope, 
529;  labours,  530;  death  and 
canonisation,  530;  his  influ- 
ence, 53 1 ;  growth  of  the  order, 
532;  compared  with  Dominic, 
533  #■:  later  history,  538^"., 
57° 

Franciscans,  259,  432,  502,  524, 
526^.,  570,  591 

Frankfort,  Council  of,  369 

Franks,  234,  235,  249,  302^. 

Fratricelli,  538 

Frederick    II.,    Emperor,    498, 

55°>  577 
Frederick  Barbarossa,  497 
Frederick,  Bishop,  252 
Frederick  the  Great,  318 
Frederick  of   Lorraine   becomes 

Pope,  438 
Free  cities,  503,  505,  506 
Freeman,  4 

French  Revolution,  429 
Fridolin,  243 
Fulda,  monastery  at,  248 
Fulk  of  Neuilly,  498 


Gaius,  93 

Galerius,  106,  114,  115 


614 


Index 


Gall,  St.,  243 

Gallienus,  105 

Gallus,  165,  243 

Gama,  De,  505 

Gautbert,  253 

Gebhard,  Ml  ff- 

Gelasius,  167,  174,  573 

Genseric,  184 

Gerach  of  Reichersberg,  518 

Gerbert,  399,  402,  404,  425,  426 

German  Church,  247,  394 

German  cloisters,  429 

German  kingdom,  391 

German  Pope,  first,  403 ;  Popes, 

425 
Germanus,  278 
Germany,    origin   of,   321;    244; 

influences,  260 
Geyza,  Prince,  257 
Geography,  505 
Ghibellines,  549 
Gibbon,  16,  73 
Gieseler,  3,  17 
Gilbert,  512,  516 
Gilbertines,  512 
Gnostics,  132,  136,  202,  268 
Goddana,  210 
Godfrey  of   Bouillon,   494,   495, 

496>  5J3 
Godfrey  of  Tuscany,  442 
Gontran,  King,  242 
Goths,  145,  302 
Gottschalk,  254 
Grammont,  order  of,  510 
Gratian,  128,  167,  171,  368,  434, 

S89 
Grecian  religion,  42 
Greek,  41 

Greek  Catholics,  76 
Greek    Church,    231,    233,    257, 

449 
Greek  Fathers,  170 
Greeks,  401 
Greenland,  252 
Gregory  of  Tours,  16,  73,  319 
Gregory   I.,  the  Great,   9,    167, 
185,  191,  216,  218,  231,  236, 
242,  270,  274,  275,  276,  298, 
329,  336.  344,  358»  365.  368> 
37°>   37i,   380,  389,  440,  441 
Gregory  II.,  245,  278,  279,  300 
Gregory  III.,  247,  280,  300,  303 
Gregory  V.,  403,  404,  425,  426, 

427 
Gregory  VI.,  410,  420,  434,  455 


Gregory  VII.,  173,  339,369,432; 
election,  446;  beliefs,  447  Jf.; 
reform  efforts,  450^".;  opposi- 
tion, 453^". ;  investiture  strife, 
45.7  #•;  Henry  IV.,  462  ff.; 
driven  from  Rome,  467;  dies 
in  exile,  467;  character,  467 
ff.;  influence,  470;  crusader, 
488;  545 

Gregory  VIII.,  546 

Gregory  IX.,  537,  538 

Gregory  X.,  526,  539 

Gregory  Nanzianzen,  349 

Gregory  of  Utrecht,  248 

Grosseteste,  590 

Gualbert,  St.  John,  431 

Guelphs,  549 

Guericke,  17 

Guido  of  Spoleto,  386 

Guilds,  576 

Guiscard,  441,  449,  494 

Gwatkin,  17 


II 


Hadrian,  Emperor,  102 

Hadrian  I.,  Pope,  281 

Hadrian  II.,  355,  418 

Hagenbach,  17 

Hakam,  485 

Hakon  the  Good,  251 

Halimand,  Archbishop,  436 

Halitgar,  250 

Hanseatic  League,  506 

Harnack,  17,  58 

Harold  Klak,  King,  250 

Hase,  17 

Hatch    on    Church    history,    4, 

58 
Hauck,  17 
Heaven,  354,  381 
Hefele,  17 
Hegesippus,  15 
Hegira,  480,  481 
Helena,  113 
Heliogabalus,  103 
Hell,  354,  381 
Helvidius,  220 
Henke,  16 
Henry  I.,  390,  420 
Henry  II.,  241,  406  ff.,  424,  426, 

572,  577 
Henry  III.,  407,  408,  409,  410, 
411,  420,  424,  427,  434,  437, 
438,  439.  456 


Index 


615 


Henry  IV.,  360,  363,  437.  439. 

446,  451,  459  #•>  46i,  463  ff-, 

467,  577 
Henry  V.,  471.  472 
Henry  VI.,  498.  549.  55° 
Henry  VIII.,  318 
Henry  the  Fowler,  424 
Henry  of  Lausanne,  559 
Heraclius,  484 
Heresy,  143,  145.  J53>  I54,  157, 

165,  183,  184,  205,  220,  247, 

295.  5i7.  SS7J[''  564.  572,  576 
Heretics,    173,    268,    293,    368, 

501,  539.  560,561 
Hergenrother,  17 
Hermits,  199,  206^". 
Herod;  79 
Herzog,  17 
Hieracus,  205 
Hierarchy,  176,  198,  260 
Hilarion,  208,  210 
Hilarius,  61 
Hilary,  144,  164 
Hildebrand,    9,    191,    363,    424, 

426,  429,  434.  435.  436>  437. 

438,  441  ff.;  chosen  Pope,  500, 

545,  548,  565 
Hildebrandine  reformation,  490 
Hincmar,  332,    336,    341,    361, 

369 
Hippolytus,  80,  177 
Hispanic,,  331 
Hirshau,  431 

Holy  Ghost,  order  of,  515 
Holy  Roman  Empire,  344,  401, 

4n#. 
Holy  Water,  372,  572 
Honoratus,  164 
Honorius,  240,  295 
Honorius  II.,  442,  513,  519 
Honorius  III.,  364,  520,  524 
Hosius,  118,  141,  144 
Hospitalers,  502 
Hospitals,  365 
Hottinger,  16 
House  of  Commons  in  England, 

5°4 
Hugh,  abbot  of  Clugny,  429 
Hugh  Capet,  387 
Hugh  of  Provence,  392 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  373 
Hugh  of  Vienne,  525 
Hugh  the  Great,  392 
Hugh  the  Long,  494,  495 
Hugo,  Cardinal,  446,  447 


Humbert,  Cardinal,  436 
Hume,   16 
Humiliati,  512 
Hungarians,  385,  493 
Huodo,  Count,  401 
Hurst,  17 
Hymns,  371 


Iceland,  252 

Iconoclasti,  277 

Iconoclastic    controversy,    267, 

282  ff.,  300,  304,  309 
Iconolatras,  277 
Ignatius  of  Antioch,  75,  80,  86, 

159,  177,  336 
Images,     not     used     by     early 

Christians,  268;  edict  against, 

278,  3  79;  5.01  _ 

Image  worship,  161,  267  ff.,  269, 

273  #■-  279  #.  3°2 
Imperial  theory  of  church  and 

state,  413,  414 
Incense,  220 

Independence  of  Pope,  302 
Indulgences,  377,  501,  560,  561, 

572,  595.  596 
Index,  573 
Industry,  198 
Innocent  I.,  167,  170,  171,  172, 

181,  452,  596 
Innocent  II.,  362 
Innocent  III.,  9,  191,  287,  339, 

362,  364,  369,  389.  4i3.  436. 
498,  500,  502,  510,  515,  519, 
522,  544,  545;  early  life,  545; 
enters  Church,  546;  chosen 
Pope,  547;  ideas  and  reform 
policy,  547  ff.;  becomes  head 
of  Europe,  549  ff. ;  asserts  su- 
premacy over  the  East,  555; 
rules  North,  556;  champions 
crusades,  556,  557;  sought  to 
crush  heresy,  $57  ff. ;  character 
and  influence,  560  ff.,  596 

Innocent  IV.,  525,  526,  580 

Innocent  V.,  525 

Inquisition,  364,  5OI»  539.  564. 
565,  573 

Inquisitors  General,  560 

Interdict,  369,  370,  577,  578 

International  peace,  503 

Interpreters,  63 

Investiture,  436,  442 


6i6 


Index 


Iona,  241 

Ireland,  240,  241,  250 

Irenasus,    57,   80,    86,    107,    151, 

157,  177,  268,  291 
Irene,  311 
Isidore  of  Seville,  330,  333,  334, 

349 

Italian  monasteries,  429 

Italians,  394 

Italy,  origin  of,  321;  reunited 
with  East,  296;  hated  Greeks 
and  Lombards,  300;  indepen- 
dence of,  550 


James,  78,  79,  561 

Janitors,  63 

Janssen,  17 

Jerome,   61,   81,    165,   181,   210, 

211,  213,  219,  230,  330,  485 
Jerusalem,    48;   massacre,    496; 

capture,  497 
Jesus,  teachings  of,  49,  55,  82, 

85,  101,  103;  and  asceticism, 

200;    and    civil    government, 

289,   364;    and    slavery,  356; 

and  baptism,   374 
Jewish  church,  46,  204 
Jewish  synogogue,  59 ;  passover, 

266 
Jews,   189,   260,   276,   277,  358, 

Joannes,  208 

Johannus Turrecrenta,  332 

John,  78,  86 

John,  King  of  England,  369,  549, 

,   552-555 

John  I.,  296 

John  II.,  179,  296 

John  VIII.,  418 

John  X.,  419 

John  XL,  429 

John  XII.,  394,  395.  396,   397, 

398,  419,  424 
John  XIIL,  398,  402,  425 
John  XIV.,  402 
John  XV.,  379,  403 
John  XVI.,  404 
John  XIX.,  407,  408,  420 
John    of    Damascus,    274,    279, 

280 
John  of  Gorz,  399 
John  the  Greek,  402 
John  of  Syracuse,  189 


John,  St.,  237 

John,  St.,  order  of,  512 

Joseph,  46 

Jovinian,  219,  220 

Judaism,  476,  479 

Judas  Iscariot,  79 

Judgment  of  God,  361-364 

Julian,  Emperor,  127,  145,  271 

Julian  I.,  166,  171,  181 

Julius  Paulus,  93 

Julius,  Pope,  144 

Jus  ecclesiasticum,  589 

Justin  II.,  185 

Justinian,    179,    187,    294,    296, 

297 
Justin  Martyr,  291 
Jutes,  235 
Juvenal,  46 


K 


Katerkamp,  17 

Keble,  17 

Kentigern,  St.,  241 

Kilian,  165 

Knights  of  Emancipation,  515 

Koethe,  prophecy  about  Church 

history,  8 
Koraish  priests,  479,  480 
Koran,  502 
Kurtz,  17 
Kylian,  243 


Lactantius,  81,  118,  220 

Laity  cut  off  from  clergy,  193, 

198;    in    12th    century,    353; 

448,  451,  571,  572 
Lambert,  386 

Lanfranc  of  Canterbury,  442 
Langton,  Stephen,  553,  554 
Las  Casas,  525 
Lateran  Councils,  360,  408,  439, 

557,  562,  563,  564 
Latin,  41;  used  in  worship,  371 
Latin  Christianity,  46,  400 
Latin  Church,  16,  255 
Latin  Empire  of  Constantinople, 

498,  502 
Latin    kingdom    of    Jerusalem, 

502 
Laurentius  of  Amain,  434 
Law,     imperial,      controls     the 

Church,  295 


Index 


617 


Law,  study  of,  503 ;  tinder  Inno- 
cent III.,  567 

Lawrence,  296 

Laws  of  Charles  the  Great,  3 1 $ff. 

Lay  investiture,  449;  origin, 
457;  opposition,  458;  Henry 
IV.  and,  459  ff.;  compromise 
in  mi,  471;  Concordat  of 
Worms,  472,  545 

Laying  on  of  hands,  375 

Lazarus,  order  of,  515 

Lechfeld,  battle  of,  393 

Lectors,  62 

Legatine  power,  501 

Lent,  266,  370 

Leo  the  Armenian,  282 

Leo,  King  of  Armenia,  555 

Leo  I.,  168,  174,  182,  344,  374, 

452 
Leo  III.,  the  Isaunan,  277,  278 

Leo  III.,  Pope,  310,  440-441 

Leo  IV.,  340,  364 

Leo  VIII.,  397-398,  424 

Leo  IX.,  424,  436,  438 

Leontius,    Bishop    of    Neapolis, 

.2  73 
Lex  Visigothorum,  330 
Libanus,  219 
Liber  Pontificalis,  330 
Liberatus,  349 
Liberius,  145 
Licinius,  n  6,  118,  124 
Lingard,  17 

Literature,  bourgeois,  570-571 
Liturgy,  254,  352 
Lollards,  283 
Lombard,  Peter,  373,  378,  525, 

592 
Lombards,  233,  303  ff.,  308,  549 
Lombardy,  crown  of,  392,  409 
Longobards,  145 
Loofs,  17 

Lord's  Prayer,  356,  371 
Lord's  Supper,  see  Eucharist. 
Lothair,  319  ff. 
Lothair  II.,  336 
Louis  the  Child,  387,  389,  420 
Louis  the  German,  254 
Louis  the  Pious,  216,    217,   250, 

253.  255>  3*9ff;  335.363.378, 

395 
Louis  II.,  320,  340,  341 
Louis  IV.,  393 
Louis  VII.,  496,  504 
Louis  IX.,  498,  526 


Louis  X.,  504 

Lucifer,  144 

Lucius,  King,  73 

Lucius  I.,  452 

Ludolph,  393,  394 

Luitgarde,  St.,  566 

Luitprand,   King  of  Lombards, 

3°2,  399 
Lull,  248 

Luther,   3,   219,  434,    451,   536, 

546 
Lyons,  73 
Lyons,  Council  of,  285 


M 


Macarius,  141,  208,  213 

Maecenas,  94 

Magdeburg  Centuries,  332 

Magellan,  505 

Magna  Charta,  554,  555 

Magyars,  256,  391,  393,  399 

Majola,  abbot  of  Clugny,  429 

Mamno  of  Cologne,  438 

Manichaeans,  105,   132,  133,  189 

Marcella,  211 

Marcellus,  139,  141 

Marcia,  103 

Marcian,  155,  156 

Marco  Polo,  505 

Marcus  Aurelius,  102 

Marozia,  419 

Marriage,  181,  204,  255,  266, 
356>  378,  407,  420,  424,  430, 
432,  436>  448,  453.  564 

Marsiglio  of  Padua,  332 

Martel,  Chas.,  302 

Martin,  St.,  164 

Martin  of  Tours,  212 

Martin  I.,  299 

Martyrs,  193,  270,  378,  380 

Mary,  Virgin,  46,  193,  356,  381 

Mass,   189,    193,   217,   218,  352, 

37°.  572,  593,  594 
Massacre  of  Jerusalem,  496 
Matthew,  80 
Matthias  Flacius,  16 
Maurice,  299 
Maurus,  512 

Maxentius,  115,  117,  123,  269 
Maximian,  114,  115 
Maximus  of  Salona,  368 
Maximus  the  Thracian,  104 
Maximus  of  Turin,  170 
McGiffert,  17 


6i8 


Index 


Mediaeval  Papacy,    5,    183,    201, 

234,  293,  389 
Meersen,  treaty  of,  321 
Meister  Echart,  525 
Melania,  210,  211 
Melchiades,  331 
Mercurius,  St.,  427 
Merovingian  kings,  348 
Methodius,  205,  254,  255,  256 
Metropolitans,  61,  337,  348,  349. 

581,  582 
Michael  III.,  254,  284 
Middle  Ages,  16,  198 
Mieczyslav,  Duke,  256 
Milan,  Council  of,  144 
Mileve,  Council  of,  171 
Milman,  17 
Milvian  Bridge,  116,    117,   118, 

123 
Minims,  539 
Miracles,  220,  501 
Missionary  monks,  198 
Missionary  zeal  of  Rome,    152, 

153,  164,  198,  229  jf.,  233,251, 

254,  255.  259,  303 
Mistiwoi,  254 
Moeller,  17 

Mohammed,  318,  450,  476  ff. 
Mohammedanism,  258,  277,  278, 

293.  476#-,  482#. 
Monarchians,  134,  253 
Monastery,  first  walled,  209 
Monastic  abuses,  407,  427,  516 
Monastic  orders,  decline  of,  515 
Monastic  Rule,  242 
Monasticism,  Christian,  45,  185, 

190,  198,   199 #.,  204^".,  209, 

2IO,  211,  212,  217,  2l8,  22off., 
239,  243,  249,  254,  421,  424, 
429,   486,    502,    510,    516 

Monk,  the  ideal  man,  198,  199, 

2I7,  352 
Monks,  421,  517 
Monotheism,  46 
Montanism,  135,  136,  177,  202 
Montesta,  order  of,  514 
Moors,  514 

Morality,  198,  353,  354,  563 
Moravians,  254 
Mosheim,  16 
Moymir,  254 
Muller,  17" 
Muratorian  canon,  81 
Music  in  worship,  193,  270,  371, 

372 


Mysticism,  570 


N 


Napoleon,  4,  307,  318,  386,  399, 

406,  408,  412,  470,  514 
Napoleon  III.,  307 
National  churches,  322 
National  states,  rise  of,  320 
Neo-Caesarea,  Council  of,  163 
Neo-Platonism,  199 
Nepotism,  563 
Nero,  84,  99,  100 
Nerva,  101 

Nestorian  controversy,  272 
Newman,  17 
New  Testament,  15 
Nicaea,  495 
Nicasa,  Council  of,  120,  131  ff., 

i42#.,  153.  iSS.  l62,  171,  175. 
176,   178,  232,  281,  282,  293, 

331.  380 

Nicene  Creed,     142,     143,    144, 

145,  171,  234,  266,  314 
Nicholas  I.,   255,  256,   283,  322, 

332,  333,  334,  336,  34°#-,  344, 
364,  389,  413,  418 

Nicholas  II.,  360,  439,  441,  442 

Nicholas  of  Cusa,  332 

Niedner,  17 

Nilus,  272,  427,  429 

Nippold,  17 

Nithard,  253 

Norbert,  St.,  511 

Norman     conquest,      241,     362, 

408 
Normans,  408,  449 
Northmen,  251,  385^". 
Norway,  251 
Norway,  King  of,  449 
Novatianists,  135,  156 
Nuns,  352,  421 
Nurses,  order  of,  515 


0 


Obotrites,  388 

Observants,  539 

Odilo,  abbot  of  Clugny,  429,  433 

Odo,  abbot  of  Clugny,  428 

Odo  of  Eudes,  386,  387 

Odoacer,  296 

Olaf,  251,  252 

Olaf  the  Saint,  252 

Oldratus,  John,  512 


Index 


619 


Old  Testament,  48 
Olga,  Grand  Duchess,  257 
Oligarchy   in  Church   of   fourth 

century,  169 
Optatus,    Bishop  of  Mileve,   9, 

73.  J69 
Ordeals,  361  ff. 
Ordination,  377 

Origen,  80,  82,  86,  137, 177.  2°5 
Orosius,  170 
Orphanages,  365 
Orr,  17 
Orthodoxy  of  the  West,  143,  I53, 

165,  181 
Ostrogoths,  232,  296 
Oswy,  King,  239 
Otgar,  335 

Otto,  Duke  of  Saxony,  390 
Otto  I.,  the  Great,  126,  253,  255, 

257,  258,  318,  390  ff.,  420,421, 

424,425,443,487  „ 

Otto  II.,  253,  394,  4°i  ff-,  425 
Otto  III.,  402  ff.,  420,  423,  424, 

425,  426,  427,  430 
Otto  IV.,  550 
Otto  of  Brunswick,  550 


Pachomius,  209 

Pachomius,  Rtile  of,  212 

Pagan  and  Christian  Rome,  55 

Paganism,  113,  120,  127,  128, 
149,  180,  190,  247,  252,  501 

Palaemon,  209 

Palestine  creed,  142 

Pallium,  576 

Palmers,  485 

Pammachus,  St.,  365 

Pantheon,  378,  380 

Papa,  or  Pope,  173 

Papacy,  rise  of,  148,  159,  160, 
lb^ff.,  169,  175,  176,  177,  182, 
189,  193,  259,  284,  295,  296, 
29,7,  299,  300,  301,  306,  309, 
2,20  ff.,  336,  339,  340,  370,  404, 
406,  412-414,  419.  423,  44°> 
441,  517,  549,  561,  566,  569 

Papacy,  decline  of,  389,  394,  410, 
419,  420,  434,  559 

Papacy  and  Empire,  391 

Papal  constitution,  337,  445 

Papal  court,  580,  590 

Papal  hierarchy,  143,  176,  299, 
344,  575 


Papal  penitentiary,  589,  590 
Papal     theory     of     relation     of 
Church   and   state,  316,   413, 

569 
Papias,  80,  86 
Paris,  Council  of,  334 
Parish,  365,  387 
Paschal  II.,  429,  471,  472,  545 
Paschal  III.,  315 
Paschasius  Radbertus,  372 
Pastor,  17 
Pastoraux,  506 
Patriarch     of      Constantinople, 

296 
Patriarch,  61;  of  the  West,  143, 

156,  349 

Patriarchs  of  the  East,  156 

Patrician  of  Rome,  308,  410 

Patrick,  St.,  240,  241 

"Patrimony  of  St.  Peter,"  ori- 
gin, 307,  394 

Paul,  46,  54,  72,  73,  74,  77,  79, 
84,  86,  87,  100,  148,  151,  170, 
248,  290,  356,  364,  440 

Paul  of  Nola,  211 

Paul  of  Thebes,  203,  205 

Paul  II.,  581 

Paula,  210,  211 

Paulina,  365 

Peace,  international,  503 

Peace  of  God,  358 

Peace,  universal,  46 

Pelagius,  171,  173,  297,  298, 
299 

Pelagius  II.,  187,  298 

Penalties,  367 

Penance,    352,    370,    375,    376, 

595,  596 
Penitential  books,  376 
Pepin,  248,  30P,  303,  304,  306, 

363,  372 
Perry,  17 
Persecution,  99  ff.,  108,  116,  119, 

152,  157,  203,  560 
Persius,  46 
Peter,  57,  72,  74,  76,  77,  78,  79, 

80,  81,  82,  83,  84,  85,  87,   100, 

151,    !53,  I59,  l66,  I7°»  237, 
239,  246,  259,   284,  290,  336, 

343,  433-  44o,  448,  451,  561 
Peter  of  Alexandria,  81 
Peter  Comester,  332 
Peter  of  Corbeil,  545 
Peter  the  Great,  318 
Peter  the  Hermit,  490,  493 


620 


Index 


Peter  and  Paul,  151 
Peter  Waldo,  559 
Peter's  primacy,  78,  79,  151,  170 
Peter's  See,  159 

Petrine   theory,  76,    77,  82,   85, 
87,    107,    169,    170,    175,    177, 

i88,  337.  544 
Pharisees,  44 
Philip,  61 
Philip  I.,  494 
Philip  IV.,  514 
Philip  VI.,  504 
Philip  the  Arabian,  104 
Philip  Augustus,  369,  497,   549, 

™55T»  577 

Philip  of  Hohenstaufen,  550 

Philosophy  of  early  Christians, 

202 
Photius,  257,  283,  343 
Piacenza,  Council  of,  489 
Pictures,  270 
Picts,  241 

Pierre  de  Bruys,  558 
Pilgrimages,  161,  193,  270,  367, 

484,  485,  486,  501 
Pindar,  43 
Plato,  43,  48 

Pliny,  governor  of  Bithynia,  290 
Pluralism,  563,  565 
Plutarch,  47 
Poitiers,  synod  of,  358 
Poland,  449 
Poles,  253,  388 
Polycarp,  155,  177 
Polytheism,  46 
Pontifex  Maximus,  149,  152,  160, 

289,  292 
Poor  Catholics,  519 
Poor  Clares,  530 
Poor-houses,  365 
"Poor  Man, "  519 
Poor  Men  of  Lyons,  519,  560 
Pope  favours  kingship  of  Pepin, 

3°4 
Popes,   61,   154,    159,    173,   180, 
233.  234,  259,  295,  296,  297, 

299,  3°°»  3°2.  3IQ,  312,  3'4, 
3*6,  322,  336,  347,  348,  349, 

355,  358,  394,  4i8,  423,  443. 
488,  57i,  575,  576 
Popes,  German,  445 

Pornocracy,  419 
Prayers  for  the  dead,  220 
Preaching,  371,  591 
Precentor,  63 


Premontre,  order  of,  511 

Presbyter,  57,  60 

Priesthood,    elevation    of,    161; 

constitutes  the  Church,  339 
Priests,  218;  freed  from  secular 

courts,  338;  duties,  352,  353; 

421;  in  conflict  with  monks, 
„  517; 586 

Primates,  348,  581,  582 
Prince  Edward,  498 
Pro-Pertine  view,  77 
Property  of  Pope,  306 
Property  renounced,  204 
Protestant  historians,  17,  76 
Protestant  revolt,  131 
Protestant  revolution,  131,  321 
Provinces,  349 
Prussians,  249 
Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals,  284, 

326  ff.,    389,   418,   436,    448, 

^  544,  548,  567,  589 
Purgatory,   266,   352,   381,   560, 

-r.  596 

Puritans,  Arabic,  479 

Pusey,  17 

Pythagoreans,  199 


R 


Radbert,  593 

Radbod,  243,  244,  245 

Radislaw,  254 

Raimbold,  Archb.,  360 

Ratherius,  399 

Rathod,  333,  335,  336,  341,  342 

Raymond,  Count    of   Toulouse, 

489,  494,  495,  5l6,  561,  56a 
Raymond  of  Puy,  512 
Recollects,  539 
Reformation,  3,    199,   203,   242, 

296,  306,  355,  404,  406,  410, 

423#-,  429,  436,  437,  448,  45°, 

451,  49o,  502,  510,  518,  526, 

544,  563,  565,  57* 
Relics,#i6i,,i9i,#i93,  220,^45, 
•  270,^06,  354,««678,  «379,  «8°, 

488,^01,^63,  572 
Religion,  definition  of,  6 
Religiosi,  217 
Remini,  Canons  of,  294 
Renaissance,  505,  526 
Remould,  St.,  429,  430 
Resemblances     and     differences 

of  Eastern  and  Western 

Churches,  286 


Index 


621 


Richard  I.,  497,  549 

Riculfus,  335 

Rimbert,  251 

Ritual,   161,   254,  255,  449.  59* 

Robanus  Maurus,  372 

Robert  d'Arbrissel,  491,  511 

Robert  of  Apulia,  459 

Robert  of  Flanders,  494,  495 

Robert  of  Molesme,  511 

Robert  of  Normandy,  494,  495 

Robertson,  17 

Rochis,  216 

Roman  bishop  becomes  Pope, 
193 

Roman  Catholic  belief,  76 

Roman  Church,  77,  107,  150, 
i52»  *53,  l6o»  l64,  176,  231, 
233.  239,  251,  257,  266,  295, 
296.  3°°»  3OI»  344,  347,  365> 
56°.  574 

Roman  constitution,  289 

Roman  Emperor,  161 

Roman  Empire,  40,  95,  98,  112, 
148,  161,  295,  312,  401 

Roman  hierarchy,  149  ff. 

Roman  language,  149,  190 

Roman  religion,  42 

Roman  see,  160 

Romans,  398 

Rome,  40,  48,  55,  U8,  150,  159 

Rome,  Council  of,  295 

Romould,  St.,  431,  432 

Rothe,  17 

Rouen,  St.,  523 

Rudolph  of  Swabia,  466  ff. 

Rufinus,  211 

Russia,  449 

Russians,  253,  257,  388 

Rutilius,  219 


Sabbath,  255 
Sabellians,  136,  137 
Sabinian,  299 
Sacerdotal  class,  63 
Sacramentaries,  372 
Sacraments,  352,  370,371,372^"., 

592  ff. 
Sadducees,  44 
Saints,  193,  270,  354,  501 
Saint- worship,  378,  379 
Saladin,  497 
Sallust,  46 
Salvation,  366 


Samaritans,  45 

Saracens,    308,    385,    388,    401, 

419,  484 
Sardica,    Council    of,    144,    165, 

166,  171,  178,  181 
Savonarola,  525 
Saxons,  234,  249,  258,  308,  309, 

318,  450 
Schaff,  17 
Schenkel,  17 
Schism,  143,  156,  165 
Schmidt,  16 
Scholasticism,  526 
Schools,  247 
Schools  of  Rome,  48 
Schroeckh,  16 
Scotland,  241 
Sebaldus,  St.,  250 
Sects,  rise  of,  132,  157 
Secular es,  218 
See  of  Rome,  301 
Seligenstadt,  Council  of,  590 
Seljukian  Turks,  485 
Semi-Arians,  141,  142 
Semish,  17 
Semler,  16 
Senators,  59 
Seneca,  47 
Separation  of  clergy  and  laity, 

63 
Separation   of  East   and  West, 

i43 
Separation  of  Roman  and  Greek 

churches,  265,  285 
Septimus  Severus,  103 
Serfdom,  504,  505 
Sergius  II.,  340 
Serviten,  512 
Severinus,  244 
Severus,  255 
Shedd,  17 
Sheldon,  17 
Shrines,  378 
Simeon,  46,  429 
Simeon  Stylites,  210 
Simon  de  Monfort,  562 
Simon  Magnus,  81 
Simony,  189,  407,  411,  421,  424, 

426,  427,  43^.  .43^  43f£   Wli 

439,  442,  448,  A50,  ASSjf.,  545, 

564 
Siricius,  173,  t8t,  2r>o 
Sirmium,  Council  ot,  144 
Sixtus  V.,  441 
Slaves,  119,  190,  290,  356 


622 


Index 


Slave  trade,  190 

Slavic  Church,  254,  255 

Slavs,   253,   258,  308,  385,  388, 

392,  399 
Socrates,  15,  117 
Soldiers  of  Jesus  Christ,  525 
Sophocles,  43 
Soter,  80 

Sources  of  history,  12-15 
Sovereign  power  of  Pope,  306 
Spain,  449 
Spanheim,  16 
Spanish  Church,  181 
Spiritales,  338,  538 
Stanley,  17 
State  and  church,  545 
States,  290,  423 
"States  of  the  Church,"  307 
Stephanus,  King,  257 
Stephen,  61,  156,  160 
Stephen  II.,  305,  307 
Stephen  IV.,  440 
Stephen  VI.,  364,  386,  419 
Stephen  IX.,  438 
Stephen  of  Chartres,  494 
Stephen  of  Lisiac,  510 
Stephen  of  Tigerno,  510 
Stephen  of  Tournai,  332 
Stolberg,  17 
Strauss,  17 
Stubbs,  17 
Sturm,  abbot,  248 
Suetonius,  95 
Suevi,  232 
Suidbert,  249 
Sulpicius  Severus,  16 
Sunday,  120,  237 
Superstitions    of    Europe,    487, 

501 
Suso,  Henry,  525 
Sutri,  Council  of,  410 
Swabians,  243 
Sweden,  253 
Swen,  King,  251,  449 
Swidbert,  165 
Sylverius,  296 

Sylvester  II.,  257,  364,  404,  406, 
,410,425,426,488      , 
Syrrmachus,  296 
Synods,  162,  352  . 
Syriac  Church,  81 


Tacitus,  46,  73,  95,  99,  101 


Tanchelm,  558 

Tancred,  494 

Tauler,  John,  525 

Templars,  502 

Temporal  power  of  the  Papacy, 
301,  302 

Temporal  power  subject  to  pa- 
pal, 559 

Tertullian,  57,  71,  73,  80,  84,  86, 
106,  107,  137,  152,  159,  205, 
268,  372,  381 

Teutonic  Knights,  502,  514 

Teutonic  Order,  250 

Teutonic- Roman    Church,    233, 

234 
Theodatus,  297 
Theodora,  282,  419 
Theodore,  139 

Theodore  of  Canterbury,  377 
Theodoret,  168 
Theodoric,  296 
Theodoras,  239 
Theodosian  Code,  296 
Theodosius  I.,  128,  179 
Theodosius  II.,  294 
Theophano,  399,  401,  402 
Theophilus,  331 
Theosophists,  45 
Therapeutas,  200,  209 
Third  Estate  in  France,  504 
Thirteenth  century,  569 
Thougbrand,  252 
Thomas  a  Becket,  545 
Tiberius,  71 
Tithes,  574 
Tithing,  unjust,  436 
Titus,  100 

Toledo,  synod  of,  358 
Toleration,  edict  of,  in  311,  118 
Tonsure,  64,  237,  266 
Torres,  333 

Tours,  battle  of,  258,  482 
Tours,  Council  of,  437 
Tozer,  17 
Trajan,  98,  101 
Transubstantiation,     370,     564, 

593, 
Travel,  42 
Treaties,  563 
Treves,  synod  of,  591 
Tribur,  Council  of,  463 
Trinitarians,  139,  141 
Trinity,  246 

Trinity,  order  of  the,  514 
Troyes,  Council  of,  471 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


0025997815 


